Mumbai Musings And Talking Terrorism

I liked the arguments of Friedman ...

Off topic ----
I visited your site. It's a wonderful collection of resources on Mumbai attack. Thanks a lot for gathering all these.

If you get some time, please visit my site also.

I think the story connected with a lot of people around the world because they could envision themselves as victims of such an attack.

When someone quotes Deepak Chopra, when someone scapegoats media who is only responsible for the coverage, when someone considers pointing out obvious facts as blame game, than one has credibility on this issue. Last thing we need is diversity of opinions when what is needed is unity of purpose and resolve. Terrorism thrives because it has friends and sympathizers and moral supporters - and no, they do not wield AK-47. They use their pens and podiums.

Thanks Diganta. I agree Ed.

Kerty, what a pity you left out Imran and Robbie Friedmann who answered questions that Deepak says many people don't dare tackle-and if you think the media is being made a scapegoat then you need to do some more reading-the last thing we need is knee jerk negativity and unthinking comments.
And even more today, we really need to understand and listento a diversity of opinions, so that we don't stay tunnel visioned. And since I said the buck begins and ends with us, what about getting a head start and being the change you want to see the in the world-of any kind, by bringing positivism and appreciation of the viewpoints of others and giving some great positive feedback that you are smart enough and capable enough to give.

If everything that is being said is obvious then how is it that many people don't get it-its because people have selective memory-they don't read or think things through. I notice in their hurry many people don't read posts in their entirety, and research further-I think what would have been great would have been if you had gone to my site and read all the interviews and articles on my site and then made said your piece. Why talk or type irresponsibly?

I always appreciate when I learn something new-I haven't from any of your comments. I like this platform because of smart people like you, around-but there is a very thin line between being smart and a smart ass. I hope we can all avoid that. The internet has become a powerful medium, and I hope we can all use it to bring people together-terrorism is not something one can stop talking about-even at the cost of repeating oneself-the media has tremendous power to influence, and cause damage- and irresponsible reporting that can endanger lives is unacceptable.
I look forward to getting some thought provoking, well researched thoughts from you and others so I can learn something other than reading the usual unthinking criticism

Kavita

"If everything that is being said is obvious then how is it that many people don't get it-its because people have selective memory-they don't read or think things through. I notice in their hurry many people don't read posts in their entirety"

Last several weeks, we have had lively discussion threads on the subject of Terrorism on this forum. Hope you have read them. Some comments may appear as negativity or unthinking comments, but that is how we challenge each other to think some more. Most of us are not as smart and savvy as Deepak and Imran, and some of us do not harbor gray areas or diversity of opinions when it comes to terrorism.

Can we bridge the gap amongst the divergent opinions so we can stand united against terrorism? Is that too much to expect from opinionists? If horror of terrorism can not unite us, what else is there to unite us? There you stand before us, giving us all the blog-full of apologists, excuses, rationalizations, justifications, opposing point of views and you wonder where the buck stops? When people are looking for directions, some people see it as their business to point them in the wrong directions. When people are craving for unambigious information to create concrete conclusions, some see it as their job to confuse them with disinformation campaign. When people are looking for strong leadership, some see it their job is to attack and paralize the leadership. When people are looking for united resolve at people and political level, all some people can think of is how to diffuse it into diversity of opinions and divergent positions. When people want to point gun at the enemy, friends of the enemy are busy erecting a decoy to shoot. When barbarians are at the gate, all they want us to do is to look for demons within each of us. No the buck does not stop with each of us. It stops with the terrorists and its fifth column. It is us vs terrorists, and either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. There are no gray areas. You are trying to frame it into 'buck stops with us' as if each of us are the victimizers and terrorists are the victims forced to do it. Terrorism can not be fought because it has friends and sympathizers and moral supporters.

Kavita to Kerty:

""I like this platform because of smart people like you, around-but there is a very thin line between being smart and a smart ass.""

Or, when it comes to kerty, between being smart, a smart ass, a garden-variety ass and just a pain in the ass. Like a prophet he can never be wrong, he has all the answers that are presumably ipso facto irrefutable and offer the only true view, so all talk of "diversity" is obviously lost on his self-righteous smug self.

Thanks Kerty

I appreciate your explanation and the fact that you have correctly pointed out that many of us look at life in terms of black and white-and unfortunately that was how I used to be until life taught me that this thinking can be a huge deterrent in creating balance, and impairs my ability to live and let live in normal day to day life.
Terrorism of course is not such a simple matter. Today people say America is worst than the worst terrorist..so how do we judge? Its all a matter of perception.
The more I think about it the more I believe that the buck does start and stop with us in that so many of us refuse to stand united in the face of what is best for all of us because individually it may go against our perception-and interestingly our perception is based on our own experiences, and the circumstances and environment we grew up in.
For example, I know friends who hate Pakistan and that is because their family lost members in Partition, and they refuse to separate the state from the people. My father too was a child of partition, and my grandmother left in a hurry with 6 young sons-but the Muslim man who took care of their lands sold it and send the money 8-9 months later through someone else, and in spite of being an army general, and having bombs put under his car by some Pakistani military people,in Afghanistan, dad and my grandmother always spoke of the country and its people with love. So I guess my perception about Pakistan became different.

You've made another excellent point-if the horror of terrorism cannot unite us, what else can? You know its really something that everyone is talking about today, in Bombay and in Pakistan- but someone said to me, this awareness is because the elite have been hit-that suddenly there is a realization that none of us is safe-that the world is no longer safe, and as Robbie Friedmann said-we can't accept terrorism like we do annual number of accidents.

Its not a question of Imran, for example being smarter, or being more savvy-actually having known him,as a cricketer, I found him anything but savvy and articulate-he was this shy bookish guy who didnt speak much; and contrary to that playboy image-I always found him stuck in a corner with a book-the entire family is very simple, unassuming and today I see a man whose words come out from the heart-and he sticks out his neck for what he believes in and interestingly he is pretty black and white. He was never my favorite cricketer, but today I respect him tremendously for his honesty and integrity and the years of selfless work he has put in to help the underprivileged in Pakistan quietly without being in the limelight-and oxymoronish it may sound, but he is an undeniably honest politician.

Imran made several points in his interview but what caught my eye was-take all the issues-Kashmir, Palestine and Israel, and so much more-the solution lies in politics and not religion, and terror has no religion-but are the politicians willing to stick out their necks and do the right thing?

So then we must think-who can force the politicians to change strategy-us-so the buck does start and stop with all of us.
Indeed there has been so much written all over the net, in print, and said on audio and video formats.. in fact sometimes I think its information overload..but sometimes in that information overload, something touches our heart, strikes deeply, repeated again and again, and I hope that, may be , that may be what may unite all of us..and so I write, and do others.. so that maybe you, or I, or Imran, or anyone else, may be that messenger, who can deeply touch,and compel us all to bring that change, that united stand. One powerful voice can change a large chunk of humanity-it could be Hitler or could be Gandhi..
so thank you for sharing your thoughts. I think you have made people mad here:) not me though!- I guess I just try and walk in the other person's shoe and try to see their perspective-I don't succeed always, but I don't take it personally. I'm also one of those people who wants very much to believe, that people share their thoughts because they feel strongly about something-and since we can't see someone's body language, we can misinterpret it as aggressive or arrogant so I do ask questions..and yes people mislead others..but I always tell everyone.. whatever happens, we let it happen.. I always have this little voice alerting me.. and when I don't pay attention to it, I pay a price
Hope to have some continued discussions with you-I appreciate your courage to stick it out-lol!
.
Common sense thank you for your post-it actually made me laugh out loud.. may be we can find some common sense in what Kerty says-I honestly didnt see any disrespect-just irritation and frustration.Or may be my brain is fried with non stop work for the past 3 weeks or so.. Kerty may be time to get away from the terror talk and do something fun. I'm going to watch a Johhny Depp film even though its past 1 a.m. here before I call it a night!
take care all!:)

Kavitha, I'm afraid this kind of soft talk is not going to lead us anywhere. I have a lot of regard for Imran Khan, but let us take his quote:
"Terrorism has nothing to do with religion. All root causes of terrorism lie in politics"

But isn't the politics of Pakistan the politics of religion to begin with? It was founded as a theocratic state with religion as the sole agenda. So how can one conveniently wash off religion while discussing Indo-Pak politics? And if really it is all about politics and not religion as the liberals claim, why the hell do they support independence of Kashmir just because it has a Muslim majority? Isn't this downright hypocrisy and dishonesty?

And then, you yourself say-
"..many Pakistanis I spoke to in the first few days, told me they were convinced the terrorists were Hindus from RSS and BJP paid to create mayhem just before the elections."

I assume most, if not all, of these Pakistanis you spoke to are not politicians. Forget whether the terrorists are state players or non-state players, the Pakistani CITIZENS (not just politicians) don't even want to accept the fact that the terrorists are from their country! Given this, liberals want us Indians to do soul searching while there is no call for their Pakistani "friends" to do the same! What kind of twisted rationale is this? Whose side are they really on?

Sorry to say this, but the liberals who dominate media and showbiz in India have zero credibility and have questionable values and allegiance. This is hardly a matter of surprise, since Dawood and his henchmen control Bollywood anyway and almost everyone there dances to his tunes. Heck, one famous actor has physically played a part in terrorist attacks but still continues to be venerated by the Indian masses!

It is always easy to explain away terrorism through mindless rhetoric like "Poverty is the root cause of terrorism" or "Religion has nothing to do with terrorism". I'm afraid this kind of talk would not lead us anywhere. In fact this would buy the instigators enough time to plan and execute their next attack.

It requires nerves of steel and great moral courage to call a spade a spade and call the enemy's bluff. I'm afraid the liberals don't have these. On the other hand, they only seem to willingly sleep with the enemy.

The singular difference this time? The liberals and opinion-makers who would espouse all the "punjabiyat" and other such inane stuff to embrace our dear neighbours to the north-west were attacked - in a place they considered a sanctuary.

That changed things - just like the WTC bombings in the US changed things for them.

As for your post about Politicians in India jumping the gun, I suppose you did not get time to read the news while you're interviewing all these chaps eh?

If Imran khan says everything's just politics and not religion maybe he could elucidate reasons for the volatile clashes that characterised Indo-Pak cricket until late, eh? In what "spirit" it was played in(especially by the Pakis).

I am a Paksitani,i have not found a single supporter of terrorisim in my faimly,friends or any one i know.We are peace loving people,life is difficult for us right now,we are watching our dear ones dying in suicide bombings every other day by which we were not aware of before 2004.When i listen this from india that roots of terrorism lies in pakistan i don't know they are talking about what.
Whatever happened in mumbai was extreamly sad we now it,because we are experiencing this grief,Paksitanies are disturbed because of reaction of indian media who started this blame game without ant investigation and obviously a reaction had to come from Pakistan side .

Absolutely there is only a political solution of this war of terror,war is not a solution.
Yes Pakistan was made for the muslims of india but the reason was political as they felt that they were not getting proper oppurtunities and ithink instead of going into more details we should live like good and supporting neighbours. yes pakistanies feel that the solution of Kashmir issue should be according to the will of kashmiries is any thing wrong with it?

sana

"yes pakistanies feel that the solution of Kashmir issue should be according to the will of kashmiries is any thing wrong with it?"

No. It will be according to the will of 1+ billion Indians. Pakistanis can take all the Kashmiris who see anything wrong with it.

You tell us terrorism is not about religion. But what the heck Pakistanis have in common with Kashmir, if it is not religion, and pathetic hatred of India? Why you got your Pakistan in the first place.

I think you should rethink your humbug claim that "I am a Paksitani,i have not found a single supporter of terrorisim in my faimly,friends or any one i know". Is that just because you have not joined the elite club of ak-47 Jehadis?

We have seen the big rallies of angry Pakistanis across major Pakistani cities burning Indian flags on the wake of Mumbai attack, all because India stated the obvious facts that the attackers were Pakistanis. Your government is still not willing to accept that they were Pakistanis. How long you guys want to live in denial mode? And you want us to live in denial too. Sooner you admit that Pakistan is a terrorist state, and all roads to terrorism leads to Pakistan, sooner people like you would be able to do something about it. But if we can't get even people like you to acknowledge it, I don't think you are part of the solution. You are THE problem. Because Jehadis we know we dont expect anything better. It is those who claim not to be jehadis, those who pose to be peace-loving Pakistanis, that continue to hoodwink and disappoint us the most.

We are peace loving people,life is difficult for us right now,we are watching our dear ones dying in suicide bombings every other day by which we were not aware of before 2004.

Sana, who are the instigators behind these suicide bombings, and where did they come from? What role did ISI play? And what are the peace-loving Pakistanis like you, and your friends and relatives doing to tackle this terrorism?

@Kerty
"We have seen the big rallies of angry Pakistanis across major Pakistani cities burning Indian flags on the wake of Mumbai attack"
As i said a reaction had to come after the blame game started from your side especially after listening the views of pathetic bharat verma and even people like simi garewal her views were really dissappointing.
By the way i will not support burning of indian flags.But the fact is extrimists are on both sides and there extreamisim have nothing to do with there religion.I don't want to give any example of hindu extreamisim.
and kafir
Yes this is something important who is behind these suicide attacks in pakistan?who wants to destablize Pakistan?who has is destablizing baluchistan and tribal areas near afghanistan?

definately not ISI as ISI is itself a target of these suicide bombings.We have to tackle this problem agreed but that does'nt mean that you start blaming us for no reason.
Again we have think rationally,It will be good for us and life will be easy for generations to come.

And what we Paksitanies are doing to tackle the terrorism?
What indian law forces or you could do to tackle those ten guys who hostaged mumbai for three days?
And here we are facing suicide bombers.
Yes we have to do something and again it require a political solution because killing innocent people from drone attacks will not do any thing but will increase extreamisim.

Okay so this will be long...

Dear Ledilus,

Your question -isn't the politics of Pakistan the politics of religion to begin with? It's a valid question and I think most people know of Jinnah's admission on his death bed that the biggest mistake of his life was the creation of Pakistan. Most people who have educated me and some of them are not soft people and I guess from the reading I've done, the conclusion has been that the division of Pakistan was not religion based but of an ego hurt, When Jinnah felt he was being sidelined when the leadership was being formed after the British left. And Jinnah was hardly a devout Muslim in the traditional sense-he was very anglicized and a brilliant man nevertheless-but how our ego makes us fall and sometimes brings others down with us. It again brings me to my point-a powerful voice can change the life of a large chunk of society. And for better or for worse, Jinnah's voice carried that clout.

It was a high powered Hindu in the Military intelligence from India, who said to me that the biggest disservice to the Muslims has been the division of India-when I interviewed people after Benazir's assassination. They are struggling in Pakistan and they are less than welcome in India. Had there been no partition you would have seen quite a few brilliant Muslims become the PM of India.

It was an interesting concession especially when the armed forces have born the brunt of the skirmishes on the border and my dad was among those officers who lost precious men from his battalion during the 71 war.
Now to my comment about being told that the terrorists were Hindus. The interviews were conducted a couple of days after the blast when there was total confusion, and there is also this defensiveness in Pakistanis- and frankly defensive aggression in Indians when it comes to finger pointing-because Indians too have been accused of terrorist activities in Baluchistan for example..

And this time unlike the time with Kargil, Pakistan has a lot of media going at it, in retaliation....No one has ever benefited from the blame game-Some thought the initial comments from both Manmohan Singh and Zaradari were positive-but look at how they were eventually perceived-people thought Manmohan Singh was too soft, in India, and Pakistanis thought Zardari was too wimpy in Pakistan when at that point bullets were still being fired in the Taj and no one knew really what was happening. Its interesting at how we are, that to this day many Indians think the terrorists of 9/11 are Pakistanis.
We cant lump all Muslims in one basket..

Now to the point- forget whether the guys are state or non state players-the Pakistanis are in denial... no unfortunately we cant forget if these are state or non state players-because we HAVE to differentiate between the state, the weak govt in Pakistan from its people-and people are people everywhere-and most listen to what the media is harping on-I think the common man in Pakistan cannot ignore terrorism because they continue to be the hapless victims in this very domestically ingrown terrorism on a regular basis. The Pakistani economy is in a mess-and who suffers-the common man. If we forget their religion and the fact they are from Pakistan-they are people like you and me who go over board when they meet you and are the closest to us in terms of DNA, culture..You have to read Imran's interview in its entirety to understand what he says... and I think people if left on their own would act differently-it's the games the politicians play that can make or break negotiations. I have to say that majority of the people I spoke with and that will be in part 2 of my coverage-in Bombay by and large blamed their own government and breakdown of infrastructure. At the end of the day,it doesn't matter who the terrorists were-the question is that how could they come in so easily and cause the destruction that they did. The soul searching I'm afraid has to continue on all sides and Pakistanis by and large are doing that-but they are really not a democracy-even today most Pakistanis acknowledge that the civilian govt is a sham.. its there with the blessings of the Military.

Interestingly Rashesh Shah, a corporate Head in India who I interviewed admitted that the corporates have to also take blame.. they are the ones who fill the coffers of the politicians-and they have never put security and terrorism on their agenda-but now they will. Most people said-we need to clean our own house before we point fingers at others-and I agree-it applies to both India and to Pakistan, but as Imran said Pakistani leaders are stooges- and it's the common man in Pakistan who bears the brunt, and America has to accept responsibility for a lot of the damage caused in Afghanistan and filtered into Pakistan and for the bombing of the world trade center. Dr Chopra made a very valid point that America has to stop thinking that its self interests are separated from that of others..
I left India quite some time ago and Indian media has definitely changed and from what I hear can by and large be bought. Many people have had first hand experience. There are some lone voices in Bollywood for instance that have spoken up like vishal of Vishal Shekhar music duo, who has moved a petition in High court for media regulation, but I remember being asked by an actor, if I would put him on the cover of the print magazine here that I was doing a feature for-and we ended up canceling his interview instead. It was a surprise for him-so I'm aware of this-and yet believe me most people by and large blindly believe what they read in the media-like there was a story circulating that Israeli commandos were in India and were very critical of how India handled the siege. Until I had it verified from the Israelis, that there was no such thing, we continued getting questions and emails about it. On the contrary both the counter terrorism experts I interviewed went on record to say people who comment don't know what is really happening and it's very irresponsible to pass judgment.

I completely disagree with you that povery/religion being the root cause of terrorism, are unimportant issues.

The question what causes young men many of whom are university graduates, embrace terrorism. The lone terrorist captured is from a poor family and the initial reports that came out- was that his family was paid 1.5 lakhs..I don't know if these are true facts, but a lot of money is coming in to train these people, much from Saudi Arabia according to counter terrorism experts. The causes are multi layered but always point to the same key issue-a feeling of being treated unjustly..whether the reason is social, economic or religious or a mix.. -and the victims often are the large population of liberals and moderates..
I doubt any one wants to sleep with the enemy whatever their leanings-anymore-simply because there is no safe space anymore anywhere..people call a spade a spade but to a rational, detached and sensible solution is not to be taken as a sign of weakness-it isn't helping anyone and that is what we must avoid. Anger begets anger, knee jerk reactions exact the same response and its just not in anyone's interest for 2 nuclear armed nations to go in for military confrontation. Maybe its time to form what friedmann quoted an intelligence officer call "to form a network to be the network"-and that we should have several intelligence forces from various countries getting together to clean house..

Bangalore Guy-I am quite aware of how Indian politicians act-and so yeah why don't we take a good long look at why they acted the way they did-why heads rolled this time and not others..and why Manmohan Singh changed tactics-unfortunately good man that he is-most Indians have scant respect for him as a politician-because they know he is a puppet-he is an economist and a brilliant one, but the poor man isn't cut out for politics-and if Indo-Pak cricket spews violence, may be you need to take a good long look at Indian cricketers and how they react to Pakistanis and others at times and vice versa. I know many of them closely and have seen what happens in locker rooms..I know many of their wives as well..and let me just say there is much more to it than meets the eye..and its never one team that is the perpetrator and the other a poor hapless victim.

Sana, thanks for your comments... I believe that most Pakistanis feel like you-there will be some fundamentalists in Pakistan and there will also be in India, but the fact is that unfortunately some elements within the Pak military and ISI still trains these terrorists.
There was an amazing series on CNN, where a Pakistani journalist took a CNN reporter to these camps and they spoke first hand to these militants.. but those elements cannot be or have not been controlled by the military as you have seen with the destruction of commandos in Haripur, the ISI buses that were destroyed.. but again here too the responsibility starts and ends with all of us. Everyone expects someone else will take the initiative to create the change-but it has to start with the common man-and Kaffir made that point.
Kerty that was a bit too harsh.. -I belong to Jammu and Kashmir and my brother is in IAS. His cardre is Jammu and Kashmir. And he has published books on J and K and ladakh that are best sellers-and so damn fat, I haven't gotten through the first one :)-its all far more complicated than your post..and indeed we have to ask the people of Kashmir most of whom have been badly victimized in all this.

Thank you for the posts all-interesting as usual-though the next 2 days are busy with guests arriving and I may not be on line much.
Take care and have a wonderful holiday season

Terrorism has no religion.

Then, what about Riots? Do they also have religions of not?

There is nothing to be ashamed for Muslim terrori or Hindu terror. Because, that is what religions are.

It is not terrorists or Governments, but the common people of the world are responsible for all these brutal murders by terrorists.

It is the common people of the world, who are intolerant and irresponsible. It is these common people who promote and give money (through charity) to fund terrorists.

The religions are completely responsible for the present day situation in the world. These so called believers of God are a big nuisance.

Bring in accountability for every religious moron, things will improve slowly. One or two prayers will not help.

The TATAs like a bunch of shameless jokers called couple of religious priests and conducted religious ceremony to open the Taj.

Religious fellows must be kept out of all important events.

Sana,

Why are Pakistanis so religious, when religion has not done any difference to the poor condition of people in that country? Why poor Pakistanis have to dream about a PAN-Islamic world order?

Unless, Pakistanis inside and outside convert it into a non-religious country, neither you nor anyone else will be in peace.

Till then, people can enjoy suicide bombings and attacks everywhere.

All the countries based on religion including Israel have created serious fault lines across the world.

It is a spiritual common sense that the more one focuses on a concern, the concern grows. By concentrating only on Kashmir and Afganistan, the Pakistanis have risked their own existence today.

There are 2 crore illegal Bangladeshis living in India now. Pakistanis can take Kashmir, slaughter Buddhists living there and then allow a holocaust here in India for these illegal Bangladeshis.

When India focused on economic growth, all the Pakistanis loved to focus on Kashmir. To get Kashmir, they created Afganistan with great Satan.
If religion can not give common sense to people, then whats the point in hanging around it?

Pakistanis had a good time in their homes, when Kashmir was burning.

Every country and every culture must not over estimate itself. Yes, there was a time Islam was ruling from Sindh to Spain. But, you missed that chance to rule the world and you will never get it again. It is the time for Chinese to rule the world now. See, they never got a chance in last 3000 years.

Unless common Pakistanis take responsibility to root out radicalism from religious places, there will be more and more "stateless actors" doing what they are meant to do.

Unless Pakistanis shed their religious identity, they will risk facing potential violence from inside and also from outside.

Kavita

"At the end of the day,it doesn't matter who the terrorists were-the question is that how could they come in so easily and cause the destruction that they did...I have to say that majority of the people I spoke with and that will be in part 2 of my coverage-in Bombay by and large blamed their own government and breakdown of infrastructure."

Once again, you are trivializing that which is most important while elevating trivial and purely defensive measures as the most important. Misdirecting us? Anybody knows no government can create fool proof omnipresent 24/7 security infra-structure that cover every nook and cranny of India. So what is the point of making government a scapegoat on those counts? Misdirecting us? Sure, government should do more to beef up security infrastructure and preparedness. But ultimately, they are all reactive and defensive measures which terrorists can always outsmart. Until government tackles the terrorists and break their will, rest are all defensive and defeatist postures. At the end of the day, it does matter who the terrorists are - in fact, it is the only thing that matters the most - because it gives us a clear target to hit. Those who do not want them to be hit, constantly give us decoys to hit, scapegoats to vent our anger, raitonalizations to look the other way. People are mad at government, because that is exactly what it has been doing - appeasing terrorism.

"The soul searching I'm afraid has to continue on all sides and Pakistanis by and large are doing that"

We do not need soul searching. We know what ails. We know what the problem is. We need resolve to address it. We need mobilization of will of the people. Not the soul searching. Those who need soul searching are the Pakistanis. But here you stand before us, telling us to do exactly opposite.

"but they are really not a democracy-even today most Pakistanis acknowledge that the civilian govt is a sham.. its there with the blessings of the Military."

Does it take rocket science to understand why Pakistanis do not want democracy or secularism or strong civilian government? Why Mullah and military remain the only power centers as rest as their puppet? Because it is a Jehadi state. And Jehadi state exists because Pakistanis want it. Try attacking any part of Jehadi state, and you would have Pakistanis up in arms. Their skin-deep civilian parts of government exist only to hoodwink aid out of west. And you want Indians to be hoodwinked by it too.

"from the reading I've done, the conclusion has been that the division of Pakistan was not religion based but of an ego hurt, When Jinnah felt he was being sidelined when the leadership was being formed after the British left"

That is a pathetic whitewash of history. You are assigning super-human qualities to Jinnah as if his bruised ego single-handedly created Pakistan. So what if he was not a devout moslem or he regretted his decisions on death bed. He led a Jehadi movement that was much bigger than him. People who lead such movements are not always devout in their personal life. Veer Savarkar who led Hindu Mahasabha was an agnostic and an atheist. Swami Vivekananda eat beef, drank booze and womanized too. Yet they all led deeply religious movements. If not Jinnah, it would have been somebody else. Don't tell me religion had nothing to do with Moslem League or its demand for Partition on religious lines or 90% of Indian moslems who had voted for referendum about such Partition. In a zeal to sanitize Jinnah, partition, Pakistan and Pakistanis and whitewash them, you seem to be twisting known realities.

"We cant lump all Muslims in one basket.."

We are not doing anything what Moslems themselves are not doing. Moslems do not like to separate or distinguish themselves from Jehadis. Moslems view any attack on Jehadis as attack on all of moslems, and attack on their Islam. When evidence for terrorist attacks point to Paki Jedadis, who gets inflamed and starts burning Indian flags? It is Paki Moslems, as if they are one and the same as Paki Jehadis. Onus to distinguish themselves from Jehadis is upon Moslems. Until they do that, there is no way to distinguish them. I do not know why you are pleading for something that moslems themselves are not willing to do. You sound like more jahadi than Jehadis.

"we HAVE to differentiate between the state, the weak govt in Pakistan from its people-and people are people everywhere-and most listen to what the media is harping on"

Why you want to differentiate something that Islamists are not willing to differentiate? Do you have any clue what islamic state means? Islamic state does not maintain your neat compartments and distinctions of state, people, religion, politics - they all are interchangible and indistinguishable terms. Kindly, do not mislead by applying terminologies and meanings cut-pasted from liberal nation-state societies. It amounts to misleading people. If you are a media person, there is no excuse for it.

"Most people said-we need to clean our own house before we point fingers at others-and I agree-it applies to both India and to Pakistan"

That is sickening obsession of seeking parity and moral equivalency even where none exists - one must blame both sides, one must point fingers at both sides. We must not accuse the other side but chase our own demons within. There is somehow moral equivalency between terrorists and their victims, between a Jehadi Islamic state and pluralistic democratic state.


"I completely disagree with you that poverty/religion being the root cause of terrorism, are unimportant issues."

Show me country that has no poor. Show me people who would not sell their soul for lots of money - how hard it would be to find few hundred such men out of population of millions? It took only 10 men to terrorize Mumbai. Do you think any nation can remove poverty such that not even 10 men are left poor to be recruited for terrorism? Can removing poverty remove terrorism? Can we remove poverty? Has any nation succeeded removing poverty? Does that mean we can't fight terrorism until poverty is removed? Isn't that a ransom and blackmail? That either we remove poverty or be terrorized. Those who are selling us poverty as the root cause of terrorism are trying to have us wage war not on terrorism, but for their own pet causes. Sounds like Ibrahim Daud's payroll has removed the poverty of lots of people in India.


"Anger begets anger, knee jerk reactions exact the same response and its just not in anyone's interest for 2 nuclear armed nations to go in for military confrontation"

It didn't stop Pakistanis from launching attacks in Mumbai and elsewhere. It has not stopped Pakistanis from attacking Kashmir all these years. It has not stopped USA from waging war on terrorism at Pakistan border and forcing Pakistan to fight terrorism within. Why is onus of preventing war only on India? Kargil war did not result in nuke. India is capable for limited, surgical, mission-specific engagement. Why are you threatening full scale war on behalf of Pakistan? Isn't that the blackmail to prevent Pakistan from being held accountable for its war upon India?


"its all far more complicated than your post..and indeed we have to ask the people of Kashmir most of whom have been badly victimized in all this."

Its not really that complicated. You can't ask Jehadis what they want and you can't give them what they want. There are no Kahmiris in Kashmir, only Indians, just as they are everywhere else in India. The whole of India is badly victimized, not just Kashmiris. As long as people see Jehadis as victims and not as victimizers, as long as people work as their PR apologists and patrons, more of the same will continue. You can make it as complicated as you want, and more complicated you make it, farther away will remain solutions. It means you are not really interested in solutions but only complicating the issues.

Kavita

"I think what needs to be done is to let moderate voices within Islam carry that battle inside and not to have outsiders tell the Muslims what to do."

Is there any evidence of moderates waging any battle inside? What battle you are speaking about? Seriously, it would have been helpful if you had been a little more specific.

I think what needs to be done is to let moderate voices within Islam carry that battle inside and not to have outsiders tell the Muslims what to do.

Oh Kavita, how communal of you!!!! *grin*
Does this apply to Indian Muslims too? And by implication that they are Muslims first, and Indians second? Or that non-Muslims have no right to suggest or tell Muslims that there is a problem?

Kavita, even if the moderates carry this battle inside, a little outside pressure is always good. I mean it was only in 2008 - seven years after 9/11, and even more since India has been suffering - that Deobandi came out with its fatwa that terrorism is wrong, but even that criticism of terrorism came with some qualifications. And if it takes them seven years to issue a declaration on something that is so obvious and a no-brainer, heavens help us!!

Kavita:

""Common sense thank you for your post-it actually made me laugh out loud.. may be we can find some common sense in what Kerty says-I honestly didnt see any disrespect-just irritation and frustration."

Thanks, but without intending to come off as smug, I can give any point of view the time of the day, and actually learn from opposing views. But I have been on DC long enough to realize that whatever Kerty has to say is so completely immersed in a particular perspective, that there is not even a hint of any "give and take". I agree that it takes all kinds to make this world, but even after having acknowledged that, I (metaphorically) pee in my pants when, in this day and age, I come across Kerty who actually argues that (paraphrase, not exact words, but accurate reflection of his views) that God arranged for AIDS to take care of gays since otherwise they would spread sexual anarchy and presumably the destruction of the world as we know it. All of his comments emanate from a particular perspective that frankly, even for a libertarian like me, cannot be engage with in a productive manner, unless I am willing the damage whatever brain-cells I have at my, shall we say, rapidly advancing age? As for your comment about Imran Khan arguing that terrorism is not about religion per se but about politics, I can well imagine, almost predict Kerty's response to it! His unchangeable perspective, something that he has repeated zillions of times without ambiguity, is that whatever is wrong with this world, in the past, present and future, all has to do with: mao, mullah, muslims, gays, pseculars etc. etc. and that's all there is to it. Hang them, execute them, torture them, send them to outer space and problem solved!

Trust me, I have not had the time to read his response to you, nor the response of his supporters to you, but I am willing to eat my non-existent hat if he has changed his tune. I am sure he feels strongly about the issue and that is why he is involved in the discussion. And I do agree that in this world, all opinions matter and should not be trivialized. Unfortunately he is the last person to acknowledge this idea of the diversity of opinion and takes on complex issues. He has never hesitated to label anyone who disagrees with him, as a supporter of terrorism. Same old, same old, "you are either with us, or against us".

Kavita to Kerty:

""I think you have made people mad here:) not me though!- I guess I just try and walk in the other person's shoe and try to see their perspective""

Not at all mad! Seriously, I have loads of time and in my job, I have to write a lot, and DC just gives me a lot of opportunity to write "on the hoof" as it were, even if others may not give a hoot!

However, about not judging someone unless you have walked at least a hundred miles in their shoes! It totally agree with you on this one. Especially since, if after walking for a hundred miles you decide that you don't like Kerty, at least you are a hundred miles away from him and you have his shoes too.

Kerty:

""We do not need soul searching. We know what ails. We know what the problem is. We need resolve to address it. We need mobilization of will of the people. Not the soul searching. Those who need soul searching are the Pakistanis. But here you stand before us, telling us to do exactly opposite."'

Hail the new prophet who simply "knows what the problem is"! Too bad we mentally challenged cannot figure out that it's all about the good guys vs. the bad guys. But what the heck, having walked in Kerty's shoes for a hundred miles, at least I have his shoes, without him having hurled them at me.

Sumnath
well i tell you we are not that religious unfortunately if we would be the situation would not be that bad economically as well as socially.
So you don't have poor people in india?
how comfortably you are suggesting Paksitanies to shed our religious identity,well thanks for your suggetion man but the other part is quite horrifying that if we will not shed our identity we will have to face voilence from inside and outside,why?why cannot you accept us by the way in Paksitan majority are muslims but we have sikhs,christians,hindu,parsis also.
why the focal point have become the religion here? As Imran Khan said all the religions taught us to be compassionate.

and Kerty

As far as creation of Pakistan is concerned,i will give my views and you guys will give yours but why can't we move forward,why don't you accept Pakistan so that life can be easier for all of us.
We have to differentiate between a jehadist(freedom fighter),extreamist and terrorist.This is the biggest mistake by and large this world is doing.
Everyone have to be listened,and Kashmir issue have to be resolved.
and your say that indian army is capable of surgical strikes in Pakistan oh common kery you are not expecting any reaction from Pakistan?

Lets be good neighbours and comeout of this blame game,Let's make life better for each other,and unfortunately it will not happen unless we comeout of this blame game.

Sana - "Lets be good neighbours and comeout of this blame game,Let's make life better for each other,and unfortunately it will not happen unless we comeout of this blame game."

Sure, we Indians should not blame Pakistan for the latest attack. Let us Indians stop claiming that Kasab is from Pakistan (despite all evidence to the contrary which have been corroborated by US intelligence).

In future, even if the ISI trains and sends an army of terrorists into India, let no one in India blame Pakistan, since we don't want to put our Pak friends in the blogosphere and on Facebook in an awkward situation. Let's just pretend the terrorists landed from Mars, so all of our cyber friends would be happy campers.

1. On Indian politicians, evidence and blaming pakisatan

Kavitha(in article):
"one thing emerged with crystal clear precision-while the political leaders in India jumped the gun and immediately started pointing fingers at Pakistan,"

BangaloreGuy(in comment):
As for your post about Politicians in India jumping the gun, I suppose you did not get time to read the news while you're interviewing all these chaps eh?

Kavitha(in comment):
Bangalore Guy-I am quite aware of how Indian politicians act-and so yeah why don't we take a good long look at why they acted the way they did-why heads rolled this time and not others..


How's your response any-way related to what you said in the post, and what I responded to? Did the reports of GPS trackers, Satphones, hijacked boats all bypass you?

Or did you forget what you wrote, and what I said, while writing your "long" replies?


2. Same thing for Imran Khan and Pakistan Cricket as well. You spout something, I point out something thats opposite that, and you go off on a tangent.

Ledzius
oh common i am not in any awkward situation here.
I am just wondering that you guys are not even ready to think otherway.

Kavita, I'm wondering if your views on the issue of terrorism are a rehash of, or influenced by the message in Subhash Ghai's movie Black and White? From reading your post and comments, I'm beginning to see some parallels.

sana

"As far as creation of Pakistan is concerned,i will give my views and you guys will give yours but why can't we move forward,why don't you accept Pakistan so that life can be easier for all of us."

It is important to understand that Moslems who opted for Pakistan were unwilling to live within all that India embodies - Hindu India, Secular India, Democratic India, pluralistic India, living among non-moslems. Pakistan symbolizes rejection of all these things. Such rejection has become the foundation of Pakistan's ideology. That is what drives Pakistan's politics and relations with India. That is what has set Pakistan on a self-destructive course of pursuing Islamic purity and Jehadism against all that is deemed not Islamic. It requires purge of all the remnants of Indianness, ethnicities, culture - thus perpetual jehads within and against the mother source - India. Unless Pakistanis comes to terms with what ails Pakistan, they will continue to hate India and war upon their own. You can't move forward without overcoming what led people of both countries to fall apart.

sana

"We have to differentiate between a jehadist(freedom fighter),extreamist and terrorist.This is the biggest mistake by and large this world is doing."

This is a serious flaw why moslems remain inseparable from terrorism. Not only it makes jehadists, extremists, and terrorists indistinguishable from each other, it makes them indistinguishable from Islam and moslems too. If world is mistaken, that is because moslems are too. And onus rests on moslems to make maintain proper distinctions, not the world. Moslems can't have cake and eat it too.

The only distinction that matters is moslems and jehadis, Islam and Jehadism, rest are merely tactics. It is Jehadism that defines the moslem world-view of non-Islamic world, its relationship with the non-islamic world. The quests for purification, purges, freedom-fighting flows from that, its rejection of secularism, pluralism, democracy, liberal society stems from that, its underdog status in a powerful modern world reduce its tactics to extremism and terrorism.

One can't call jehadism to be freedom-fighting because freedom or democracy is not the end game but naked conquest for islam. If there is a case for genuine freedom-fighting, than it should be delinked from Jehadism. By linking freedom-fighting with Jehadism and by linking Jehadism with Islam, moslems are essentially giving religious sanction to terrorism. You can't turn around and than claim religion has nothing to do with terrorism, moslems have nothing to do with terrorism. If you fail to make proper distinctions and maintain proper distances from certain concepts, than the buck stops with you.

"Everyone have to be listened,and Kashmir issue have to be resolved."

We do not listen to jehadis, we do not negotiate with them, we do not give in to their demands, we are not interested in resolving their issues.


"and your say that indian army is capable of surgical strikes in Pakistan oh common kery you are not expecting any reaction from Pakistan?"

If we attack only terrorist network, why would peace-loving Pakistanis give us bad reaction? We fought Pakistan in Kargil, and Pakistanis did not give us all out war. Why would Pakistanis give us all out war if India limits its strikes to terrorist strongholds? Won't Pakistanis greet us as liberators from the scourge of terrorism? I am sure you guys are suffering from terrorism too and want terrorist strongholds to be neutralized. So walk the talk with India. If you do not want India to strike inside Pakistan, have your government do it on its own. Don't just sit there and give excuses and alibis. I know threat of all out war is a blackmail used by Pakistanis to stop India from targeting Terrorists within Pakistan. And India should call this bluff. If threat of all out war and Indian nukes have not deterred Pakistan from sponsoring anti-India proxy wars, why should India be deterred by the same? India should join with USA to dismantle terrorism from Pakistan. And Pakistanis like you should join too, that is if there are peace-loving Pakistanis who do not support Jehadism.

From today's Times of India -

"On Tuesday, Mehsud, whose TTP is one of the biggest Taliban terror groups in the FATA areas, offered his bombers to the Pakistan army to fight India."

"a senior Pakistan army official told journalists soon after Mumbai attacks that the military and Taliban were fighting in FATA due to "misunderstandings". "We have only some misunderstandings with Baitullah and Fazlullah. These misunderstandings could be removed through dialogue," he had said. It was later revealed that the army officer was a corps commander. "

It is quite clear that any distinctions between the terrorists and the Pakistani army is just superficial, since ideologically they are fighting for the same cause. It is most likely a pretension just to hoodwink the international community.

The only silver lining here is that this deception is now not just India's problem, but a global one. Obviously something will be done about it (even if removing the nukes from Pak military's control, since the latter is sleeping with the terror networks for all practical purposes).

There have been very few times in recent history where the underlying theme behind wars between nation-states have been an unqualified good vs. evil, as opposed to ethnic, control over resources, or other mundane considerations.

Probably the most important war that comes to mind is WWII, where the Nazis, in the conscience of most normal people, stood for evil. Even people who would have been for peace otherwise were compelled to take sides here, since they saw no other way out. Thanks to this and the concerted efforts of the Allies, the forces of evil were defeated, although this came at a great human cost. At the end, the German volk had to do major soul searching for what allowed their society to breed this kind of evil.

Thankfully Churchill didn't happen to be another Chamberlain, and thankfully we didn't have European versions of Arundhati Roy and other liberals moulding public opinion at that time. Otherwise the outcome would have been very different. Those who collaborated with the Nazis, such as the Vichy were executed for treason shortly after the war's end.

What we are seeing now is history repeating itself. But this time it seems to be more dangerous for many reasons-
1. The enemy now has nuclear weapons, which Hitler never did.
2. Unlike Nazism which could be morally rejected outright, the kind of ideology that the new enemy stands for has the status of a major world religion and hence is immune to such critical assessments. However in all other respects, it comes quite close to the former, including the establishment of a world Caliphate (not unlike the "Thousand Year Reich" that Hitler himself envisioned), and the use of force to achieve complete subjugation of the body and mind of the human race.
3. Unlike WW2, where people outside of the sphere of the Axis powers could clearly see the writing on the wall and rallied behind their respective governments to defeat this force of evil, at present we have very vocal sympathisers of the current evil regime who cannot make such moral distinctions and either blame their own country or try to deflect attention to something else.
4. Just the way Hitler brainwashed his whole country into believing that the rest of the world was conspiring against it, we have the military-religious establishment in the country doing the same to its people quite successfully.

Only time will tell how this situation plays out.

Imarn batting for banned Jamaat-ud-Dawah
PTI
Dec 25

"According to television reports, former Pakistani cricketer-turned-Tehreek-e-Insaaf chief Imran Khan has criticised the ban on Jamaat-ud-Dawah. He told a news channel, "JuD's work was appreciated during the earthquake and its work has been the best during that time... Due process of law was not followed in banning Jamaat-ud-Dawah.""


http://www.dailypioneer.com/145933/Pak-gets-aggressive.html

Ledzius

Just read your #33. I cannot help but say that that is very good thinking. But unlike Hitler these folks are not attacking with armed forces. That is why you need a very good strategy to defeat them. Enemy is hard to identify. And that is why the US has not won yet in Afghanistan.

Morris

"you need a very good strategy to defeat them. Enemy is hard to identify."

Good point.

1) The first step is to identify the enemy. It is easier said than done. If we can not get to agree on what the enemy is, nothing else can work. If enemy does not exist, there is nothing to slay.

2) The second step is to identify the ideology that makes one an enemy. Enemy does not have 10 heads. He looks just like anybody else. Yet, it is the ideology that sets him/her apart from rest of people. You can't attack the carrier of ideology, and think the work is done.

3) The third step is to isolate the ideology. Ideology is akin to virus that spreads among people and turns the people into carrier of ideology. It is important to make sin and sinner analogy.

4) The forth step is to figure out how to deal with ideology and its carriers.

So far, people have tried 2 approaches. None of them very good

a) You can keep attacking the ideology with propaganda and politics, but carriers can keep spreading it and resurruct the ideology, bringing the whole exercise to futility. You can keep convincing and converting the individuals with propaganda and politics, but ideology can keep converting people at faster rate, bringing the whole exercise to futility. Can you convince people and wean them away from ideology, one individual at a time? Nope. The struggle can last for 1000 of years. Not very promising.

b) Progroms. You just round them up and finish them off. If all carriers can be rounded up, their physical institutions can be pulled down, their ideology and power centers would crash. That is how Islamic hordes won over much of pre-islamic world. How Nazism sought to deal with Jews and how Nazism itself was defeated. How imperial Japan was removed. War gives perfect pretext to execute this strategy. It can't be done is peace time, by peaceful means. It needs overwhelming war and draconian force to be brought to the table. Otherwise, all one can have is free for all civil war, like we have seen in Kosovo, Afghanistan and other festering trouble spots. One can say, examples of success are too few, and success is not guaranteed. All it can do is temporary stop gap relief. But at what price?

c) Bush inturrupted

Bush tried to classify the ideology as terrorism and adopted one of the most comprehensive global strategy we have seen in modern history. And for the first time, it put the ideology on the defensive. But it also exposed the pitfalls of dealing with an ideology that is wedded to religion. And also when counter-terrorism loses its focus and gets wedded to needless geo-politics. If Obama can fix the misdirection and restore its rightful course, we might actually see this ideology on the defensive and on the run.

kerty

I can understand most of what you say. But I get lost when you get to a) and referred to 'carriers'. Who are these carriers? And how do you round them up? I think they are spread all over if you are thinking of who I think they are.

"No sooner does the historian think he has isolated the particular quality of a civilization than it gives proof of the exact opposite. Civilizations may be fraternal and liberal, yet at the same time exclusive and unwelcoming; they receive visits and return them; they can be pacific yet militant; in many ways astonishingly stable, they are nevertheless constantly shifting and straying, their surface disturbed by a thousand eddies and whirlpools, the tiny particles of their daily life subject to random movements."

- Fernand Braudel,

CS

Those whom we call historians seldom think and those who think we seldom call them historians.

- kerty

"Life is a tale told by an idiot full of sound and furry signifying nothing!!"
-- Ernest Hemingway

Kerty you going in wrong direction again as far as persuing islamic purity is concerned its any one's right just like you may have persued hindu purity and believe me its not a dstructive way.
Anyways its not about the religion so its better to not indulge in all this.
As far as india's surgical strikes are concerned no thankyou if we will find that something is wrong here we will tackle ourself you guys should remain busy in your own country,as you are not even able to decide that who is terrorist.

Ledzious
What about your Gugrat chief minister who is the chief terrorist ,he is still not caught so indian army,police,judicial system every one is terrorist right?

Morris
US have not won in Afghanistan and will never win as they are also unable to recognize the terrorists,killing innocents will never make them win its a battle of hearts and minds,which they have lost at least for centuries to come.

As far as ban on Jamat ud dawa is concerned definitely the due process of Law was not followed as they were not given the chance to defend themselves.

By the way what a strategy in the making guys i am impressed.

any ways i have got a news for you three more indians have been caught in Lahore after that indian spy.These guys were involved in Lahore blast.
Dawn News

I feel most of are pussyfooting around the root cause of terrorism.It is NOT political or economic grievances as commonly portrayed by the liberal democrats.
Commonsense questions to ask ourselves would be?
-Why most of the terrorists are muslims when most of developing world has some grievance or other.?
-Why can't moderate Islamic scholars issue a fatwa proclaiming violent jehad un-Islamic?
-Why don't Imams specically say that killing innocent NON-MUSLIMS is un-Islamic based on Islamic religious dogma?
I believe if you can defang the jehadi thesis base don religious canons,recruits from the youth would dry up.
After reading the discourses on www.faithfreedom.org I am not hopeful the above is easy.It might be well nigh impossible.
Unless you treat the root causes,lasting cure is impossible. Does humanity has the will and knowledge for that? A scary thought indeed!
-Raj