Shanti,

Watching BBC World TV led me to think that the media was hoping there is bad news, hoping that they could blame the security forces…

Like vultures

Nitin

You said it, Nitin - they are not news reporters anymore - they want to be part of the news more than ever.

Dont get that outraged. The Russians have killed more than One-Third of the Chechnyan Population, while the World has largely ignored the mini genocide.(Makes you wonder why the Muslim world doesnt protest that while they go into a frenzy when 50 people are killed in Jenin as along with 29 IDF Soldiers. Between Putin was given a standing ovation at the Organisation of Islamic Countries OIC. So much for hypocracy) In 98 Putin bombed Grozny the Capital of Chechnya and killed tens of thousands of people. ( The OIC is apparentnly not aware of it yet) I think if you indiscriminately bomb a whole city you are asking for trouble. Go to www.hrw.org or www.amnestyinternational or the US Government, State Deptt ‘Country Report’ on Russia/Chechnya . The Russian atrocities are no less heinous and much higher in number. In Chechnya 75% of the women are either raped or have had their husbands or someone from their immediate family killed. Look up the BBC for scores reports of Russian soldiers raping dead women. If I were Chechnyan I would not hold up a school of children or kill any civilians period. ( But I also think that Gandhi had some point) I think the Chechnyans are obviously desperate. I wonder how much right do we people have now to be completely outraged when we ignored the systematic destruction of their country and people. Its something like what the LTTE was doing. LTTE would use children as suicide bombers. The whole world expressed outrage and the idiot Rajiv Gandhi sent the IPKF to support the Sri Lankans. But where was the outrage when the Tamils in Sri Lanka were being ethnically cleansed.

Clarification : In my next post I am lamenting the fact that we people dont hear about problems unless they are sensational and then we express shock. I am in no way either justifying or excusing the behavior of the Chechnyan, Dagestanio terrorists.

Al Mujahid:

No question that the past several years have been miserable ones for Chechnya. The Russian army is simultaneously one of the most brutal and most incompetent forces in the world. However, holding schoolchildren hostage, when you know your opponent has no compunctions about using force, is nonsensical. You will not win favor with the world. If Russia were to go in and level every village in Chechnya from the air, and then steamroll them under tanks - the rest of the world will do nothing - not the West, not the “ummah”, nobody.

Well I dont know how much is there left for the Russians to do. The West and the ‘Ummah’ have already sat through the total destruction of Grozny. Also I think the Chechnyans are acting out of desperation. It seems to me that they know that they have lost already and have decided to hit the Russians where it hurts the most before they are totally decimated. I guess they have lost hope.

Dont get that outraged. The Russians have killed more than One-Third of the Chechnyan Popoluation.

Yes, yes, that is 100% true, and therefore, let’s shoot hundreds of 10-year olds dead, when we haven’t been quite successful in starving them to death in the first place.

It seems to me that they know that they have lost already and have decided to hit the Russians where it hurts the most

Exactly. Hit them where it hurts the most. Let’s show our Islamic courage. Let us draw from our Quranic wisdom. Let’s take over their day care centers and massacre their toddlers. Maybe we shoud invade hopsitals and kill babies when they are still in their mothers’ wombs. Haven’t they murdered three-fourths of Chechen population?

However, holding schoolchildren hostage, when you know your opponent has no compunctions about using force, is nonsensical.

Extremely logical. Why hold school-children hostage? Maybe residents of an Elder Care Center would have made the right target. They are laid out to pasture anyway, consumed by age and disease. Killing a few hundred of them in the name of Allah the all-merciful would definitely have won us the world’s admiration.

yours in jihad,
rr

Whats the big deal with killing children anyway. Killing innocent people is always wrong. So what if they were children. This is a war going on there. Deal with it.

Whats the big deal with killing children anyway. Killing innocent people is always wrong. So what if they were children. This is a war going on there. Deal with it.

Precisely. Why quibble when each life snuffed out gets us no more than 72 houris, whether that life is that of a 10-year old soldier of war or 25-year old soldier of war?

Let’s be pragmatic. Kids be killed. Allah be praised. May we rake in more virgins.

jihadically yours,
rr

Al Mujahid & KXB both make good points.

Russia however, is no stranger to sacrificing it’s own. Russia lost 3 times the number of jews who died in the halocaust during the war, but gets no press, because they were soldiers.
It’s one of the reasons that they were feared during ww2….they put very little value on the lives of individuals.
Russia also is responding to terrorism in the same fashion, by saying “your attempts to terrorize us are fruitless…we will kill you along with our own to stop you…”
In many ways, Israel subscribes to the same philosophy… this might be one of the reasons that El Al is an airline that has seen few highjackings…terrorists know that the government will not bow. That it would be a fruitless endeavour.
Voila!
The birth of the suicide bomber.
The most dangerous people in this world are made by taking everything away from a people so that they have nothing left to lose.
Humans are the most dangerous animals.

The most dangerous people in this world are made by taking everything away from a people so that they have nothing left to lose.

Like, for instance, the Kashmiri Pandits living in shanty towns around Jammu and Delhi? Hvaing had everything taken away from them, they have nothing to lose but their miserable existence in slum colonies, yet strangely enough the ones doing the suicide-bombing are their tormentors!

Contrariwise, how about Osama bin Laden? And his well-heeled chelas who drove planes into WTC towers? They had wealth and comfy living to lose. Why did they turn into maniacal killers?

What was taken away from the Arab terrorists who joined the killers in Beslan? Why is it their business to kill on behalf of the Chechen terrorists, even if agreeing for argument’s sake that the Chechens had “everything taken away from them”?

Human beings are also endowed with a faculty that other animals aren’t: rationality. Putting a gloss on the activities of vermin who pump bullets into children is to betray a lack of it.

RR, I think all killings are wrong. Doing killings for getting 72 vigins is not any worse than butchering Muslim Gujaratis for the Monkey/Chimpanzee/Elephant/2 Penised God. I dont think the Chechnyans did that to get 72 virgins. Virgins are only ‘promised’ to men and not to women. So why were some of the Chechnyan terrorists women. The Chechnyans do have a legitimate grievance with the Russians. You can shut your eyes and keep thinking its all about the virgins. Suicide bombings is not all about virgins and Allah. If that was the case there would be no Kamikazis and the Tamils would not have put suicide belts on themselves (and their children). Its about desperation and losing hope. Desperate people do desperate things. During the Cuban revolution suicide bombings were common too. I am sure the Cubans were not doing suicide bombings for virgins.

Desperate people do desperate things.

Right. The only way those poor, desperate terrorist bastards — Arabs and Africans included — could help themselves was by pumping bullets into the backs of desperate children. I can very well understand that.

I think all killings are wrong.

You sure? How can genociding children in the cause of Allah be wrong?

Given your candour has actually come as a whiff of fresh air, I am surprised that you’re suddenly showing weakness. Have I sort of emotionally blackmailed you into accepting something that your whole system rebels against? You don’t have to feel compelled to live up to any non-Islamic ethical standard. You know, the commies used to say — and still say — that they weren’t required to live by “bourgeois decencies”.

Doing killings for getting 72 vigins is not any worse than butchering Muslim Gujaratis for the Monkey/Chimpanzee/Elephant/2 Penised God.

Desperate people do desperate things indeed, like coming up with freaking dubious moral equivalences.

RR, The Russians by occupying Chechnya and killing scores of Chechnyans have now surrendered their right to bitch about how the Chechnyans fight back. Lets say if you come to my house, then throw me out in the yard, rape my wife and kill my daughter and start living in my. Then if your daughter comes out to go to school and I slap her, you dont have a right to tell me that I am not fighting fair. Now the neighbors do have a right to bitch but if the neighbors were completely silent when you were killing my wife and raping my daughter then the neighbors would now be accused of selective outrage. Thats what I am accusing the people here of doing. Of being selectively outraged.
Ofcourse my action of slapping your daughter is not right either because shes innocent. However even though I am wrong and should be criticised, two groups of people have lost their right to be ‘outraged’,namely you (Russians) dont have a right to complain and the neighbors ( you and other people on this website) shouldnt get selectively outraged either.
Hmm, I think I have somehow given you the impression that either I am some sort of Islamic Fundamentalist or just Muslim or a terrorist sympathizer. My name means ‘The Fighter’ in Arabic. You might have confused that with ‘Mujahideen’ which means ‘fighter for faith’. You said “You don’t have to feel compelled to live up to any non-Islamic ethical standard” I dont live by any Islamic Standard. Also you have made repeated references to Islam/Allah/Virgins to sound sarcastic or whatever. I dont care about Islam or Allah because I am not Muslim.

The Russians by occupying Chechnya and killing scores of Chechnyans have now surrendered their right to bitch about how the Chechnyans fight back.

That we can see. The “Chechen fighters” enrol Arabs, Africans and Al Qaeda and “fight back” by murdering children who “occupied” Chechnya, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Afghanistan etc.

Alla hu akbar.

RR

Al-Mujahid —

Makes you wonder why the Muslim world doesnt protest that while they go into a frenzy when 50 people are killed in Jenin as along with 29 IDF Soldiers.

Would you explain, please — Is it the protest (or lack of it) afterwards that decides how horrible an event is? Not the event itself?

And RR, this is your ghostly friend again. In response to Al-Mujahid’s mention of the killings in Gujarat, you wrote —

Desperate people do desperate things indeed, like coming up with freaking dubious moral equivalences.

Would you clarify, please — in what sense was the killing in Gujarat not morally equivalent to the killing in Besslan? That is, apart from you saying so.

Sudhakar Nair

RR, its pointless debating anything with you. I think you read the first line of a post and reply immediately without reading the rest of the post.

I think you read the first line of a post and reply immediately without reading the rest of the post.

I am not derbating with you at all. You obviously have empathy for the s.o.b’s who massacred on a large scale kids who have nothing to do with any conflct. If an event as horrible as this doesn’t cause repugnance in you, and in fact elicits from you a response such as “if poeple gotta be killed what’s the big deal if they are kids?”, then honestly, I don’t know how to debate with you. I have not been debating actually; I have only been sarcastic; and I can see that my attempt at injecting some respect for civilizational norms into the conversation was futile.

jihadically yours,
rr

Would you clarify, please — in what sense was the killing in Gujarat not morally equivalent to the killing in Besslan? That is, apart from you saying so.

Lallahoos to you too, dear ghastly Sudhakar Dilip Khanna Mukta.

What I do NOT see doesn’t have to be explained, mate. It was not I who turned desperate and dragged Gujarat into picture to justify the massacre at Beslan.

But since you seem to be agreeing with our jihad-loving, 2-penis-god-hating friend that there IS a moral equivalence, well, be my guest, go ahead, and establish it.

Cheers,
RR

RR —

dear ghastly Sudhakar Dilip Khanna Mukta

It’s ghOstly, dear man! A week hasn’t rid you of your endearing tendency of painting your critics as imaginary (imOginary?), I see.

there IS a moral equivalence, well, be my guest, go ahead, and establish it.

Okey-dokey. In Besslan, we saw about a thousand kids being held captive for 2 days without food and water, terrified out of their minds, shot without reason. This happened to them in the name of a cause that had nothing to do with them.

In Gujarat, we saw about a thousand Gujarati people killed. Many were burned, many were raped and then burned, pregnant women were slashed open and their fetusses were killed, and many children also died. This also happened to them in the name of some cause that had nothing to do with them.

Did I miss anything, my ghost-loving friend?

I’m trying very hard, but I’m unable to see any moral difference in these two things. Both are mind-blowing and horrible. Do you see a difference, RR, and if you do what is it?

Do you plan to cop out once again?

Sudhakar

N.B:- when I say ‘Gujarat’ above, I mean Godhra too.

N.B #2:- Al-Mujahid, I wait for your answer too.

Lallahoos my ghastly comarde.

In Besslan, we saw about a thousand kids being held captive for 2 days without food and water, terrified out of their minds, shot without reason.

Absolutely. I am thrilled that you got it all right.

This happened to them in the name of a cause that had nothing to do with them

What cause?

Who are those who killed them? What cause did the Arabs, the Africans, the Chechens and the Pakis who trained them all have in common that required pumping bullets into children? How is that cause seen to be served by killing children? Explain comrade.

In Gujarat, we saw about a thousand Gujarati people killed.

True.


Many were burned, many were raped and then burned, pregnant women were slashed open and their fetusses were killed

Some detail there no doubt true. Some detail the feverish imagination of hate-peddlers intent precisely on building dubious moral equivalences. Don’t you know that Harsh Mander and Times of India were castigated by Press Council of India for spreading rumours? That Arundhati Roy was caught peddling lies?

But I digress.

This also happened to them in the name of some cause that had nothing to do with them.

What cause? Explain comrade.

I’m trying very hard, but I’m unable to see any moral difference in these two things

I am not convinced that you are workig hard. There’s an air of utter ease about the way you go on conjuring up dubious moral equivalences. Admit it: you’re pastmaster at this game, aren’t you?

Both are mind-blowing and horrible.

Being mind-blowing and horrible doesn’t necessarily constitute an equivalence. Gujarat earthquake was horriblle. The Orissa cyclone was mind-blowing. The manner in which Marixsts in West Bengal win elections by intimidating voters is both mind-blowing and horrible. But it takes either a lunatic or a propagandist to put all these in the same league as Guj riots, and it takes another lunatic or propagandist to equate the latter with Baslan or 9/11 or Akshrdham or Bombay blasts.

Do you see a difference, RR, and if you do what is it?

I do see lots of differences, comrade Mukta Nair, but we get there after you have firmly established the moral equivalence you have set out to establish.

Do you plan to cop out once again?

You won’t be able to sustain this without getting increasingly bizarre; take my word for it.

when I say ‘Gujarat’ above, I mean Godhra too

How helpful. Instead of using “Gujarat” as your primary reference, why not start using “Godhra” then, and add helpfully: “whan I say Godhra, I mean Gujarat also”?

By the way, same cause or different causes?

In solidarity,
RR

RR you have exposed yourself. Its actually funny. For a minute I thought that you were a humanitarian. I guess you are just a Hindu Fanatic who didnt see the macabe dance of death of your comrades in Gujaray but saw rumors peddled by the Satan Worshipping Times of India and I am sure what you would call Imperialist Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. Congratulations. And stop being sarcastic about Allah/Muhammad/His Bitch/Virgins and Naked boys with me. I am NOT MUSLIM. So I dont care about ISLAM.

Nair, the response/outrage to an event does not define how bad the event was. I was suggesting that the Muslim World is hypocritical when it comes to Chechnya. They beat up on Israel because they say Israel is doing bad things to Muslims. They however ignore the killings of Muslims in Chechnya. Which suggests to me that theres some racism in their outrage. I was lamenting on the Muslim World’s hypocricy and not defining an event by quantifying the reaction to it.
RR, I understand that your puny little mind is not capable of either debating or making any argument which makes sense. Thats why you have resorted to using Islamaphobic sarcasm in your posts. I guess that atleast saves you from actually thinking.

That Arundhati Roy was caught peddling lies?

This seems vaguely familiar. Wasn’t somebody caught with their pants down last week for claiming that Praful Bidwai called software programmer cyber-coolies? Oh yeah… we know who it was. Pot, kettle & all. Wish Mukta Khanna was around…

Wasn’t somebody caught with their pants down last week for claiming that Praful Bidwai called software programmer cyber-coolies?

Pervert. Always dreaming of people with pants down.

By the way, dear ghastly Mukta Nair Sudhakar Khanna, since pasting the label of “liar” on me looks like a life-and-death problem for you, let us settle this issue.

Pra-non-fool’s column title is: “IT Experts or Cybercoolies?” Software engineers work in IT. Call center people work in ITES. What spin are you gonna put on this? That Pra-non-fool is indeed a fool who doesn’t know the difference between IT and ITES? That he uses his titles just like that, for fun? That he has a fetish for down-pants too?

Intrigued.

In solidarity,
Raghu

RR, I understand that your puny little mind is not capable of either debating or making any argument which makes sense.

Absolutely. I admit that I have not yet obtained the lofty intellectual heights where I know to appreciate the mass-murder of children.

By the way, congratulations. You actually posted half-a-dozen messages before you flashed the trump-card: “islamophobia”!

jihadically yours,
rr

RR my friend —

it takes either a lunatic or a propagandist to put all these in the same league as Guj riots, and it takes another lunatic or propagandist to equate the latter with Baslan or 9/11 or Akshrdham or Bombay blasts.

Smooth operator! Bring up the cyclone and quake and faked elections and make the trivial pronouncement that these are not in the same league as the Gujarat riots (nobody claimed they were); then segue over to Besslan and 9/11 etc and hope that the same trivial pronouncement will still hold water.

But oops! It doesn’t! My sympathies. Not so smooth, really, cOmrade.

What precisely is the huge gulf that you see between the Gujarat killings and Besslan/911/Akshardham/Bombay blasts?

The scale of the killing? Well, 1000 in Gujarat: compare with Besslan 300, or 9/11 3000 or Akshardham 30+ or blasts 300. Seems generally comparable to me.

The horrible way people died? Well, burning and raping and chopping up people in Gujarat: compare with shooting kids in Besslan, or flying planes into WTC, or shooting worshippers in Akshardham, or blowing them up in the Bombay blasts. Seems little to choose to me.

The fact that utterly innocent people died? Well, the 1000 dead in Gujarat were innocent humans; as were the dead in Besslan, Akshardham, 9/11 and the Bombay blasts. Again, as horrible all around.

What else?

Yousee, my ghost-O-phile friend RR, so far we have only your sayso that these atrocities were not morally equivalent. Only your liberal use of words like “lunatic” and “propagandist”. Okay, so tell us now: what is the moral difference you see between them?

Or do you plan to cop out yet once more?

Instead of using “Gujarat” as your primary reference, why not start using “Godhra” then, and add helpfully: “whan I say Godhra, I mean Gujarat also”?

Because whEn I say Godhra, I mean Godhra.

In the same way as, if I say “the school fire happened in Kumbakonam”, I mean Kumbakonam, and not “the school fire happened all over Tamil Nadu”. Whereas if I say “The mid-day meal scheme has been implemented in Tamil Nadu”, I mean it is in operation in Kumbakonam as well.

Thus whEn I say “in 2002, there was killing in Gujarat”, I mean in towns and cities all across that state. Including Godhra. Except, there are some hyper-active people who will jump up at that and say “But what about Godhra?”, apparently forgetting that Godhra happens to be IN Gujarat.

Got it? Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. What is the vast moral gulf, RR? We ghOsts would like to know. No more cOpOuts, Okay? No more “It takes a lunatic” sort of hand-waving, Okay? Just buckle dOwn and tell us.

And Al-Mujahid: that the Muslim World is hypocritical and racist is hardly news. But when you point to that hypocrisy up in the aftermath of Besslan, you effectively dumb-down the scale of that atrocity. Besslan is horrible even if some in the Muslim world show more outrage over Jenin.

This is why I was making the point that it is not the condemnation (or lack of it) that makes an atrocity an atrocity, it is the atrocity itself. We fell into this trap big-time in Gujarat: instead of being horrified at the slaughter from Godhra to Naroda to Baroda to Kalol and dozens more places, we got caught up in demanding who had condemned what.

I saw the same thing in your reaction, which alarmed and disappointed me.

Actually I agree with one point you made: the fact that it was kids in Besslan doesn’t make it more horrible. Would it have been any less of a crime had they rounded up 1200 adults, starved them of food and water, and started shooting them in the back? I know RR is likely to latch onto this to evade telling us ghOsts why there is a moral difference between these events, but never mind.

Nair, my whole point was about ‘selective outrage’. I do agree with you that maybe my point about selective outrage in some way diminished the degree of how horrible the incident was. It seems to me that you are not a card carrying member of the ‘Hinduvta Brigade’. Could you please explain to me why so many of Indians in the US are such big supporters of the Hinduvta Brigade. Almost every Indian that I have met in the US is a big BJP supporter and has no problems in funding organisations which committed pogroms in Gujarat. Maybe you could explain to me on whats going on because I sure cant figure it out. Btw theres a very good artilce by Martha Nausbam on parallels between the rise of Nazis and the Hinduvta movement. Peace.

Thanks for raising a valid point Al Mujahid. I am working in Singapore. Just the other day, one of my Indian colleagues made this statement that all Muslims are terrorists. This is unbearable, sick and scary. I wonder where this is all heading to.

Lallahoos my ghastly comrade Sudhakar Mukta,

Smooth operator! Bring up the cyclone and quake and faked elections and make the trivial pronouncement that these are not in the same league as the Gujarat riots (nobody claimed they were

Don’t pay me complements that I don’t deservre dear Ghastly.

I mean, look at this. A jihad-loving, 2-penis-god-hating Muhajid desperate to justify the massacre of children brings in extraneous issues like Gujarat, and what do you do? You desperately clutch at that straw with such vehemence as if your ghastly life depended on it, and attempt a crusade on me. What ought to be a discussion of Baslan you have rather spectaularly and successfully turned — and helped our Mujahid turn into — a pissing contest centered on Gujarat.

How can I or for that matter anyone be a good enough smooth operator at all in the presence of the Ghastly Emperor of Smooth Operators?

Or do you plan to cop out yet once more?

Let us nail this one, dear Ghastly Emperor of Smooth Operators. You sound like a stuck record repeating this favorite line of yours, the other being that fantasy about seeing people with their pants down.

You averred that the killers in Baslan killed for a “cause”. Ditto with Guajarat (by which you mean Godhra also) too, you opined.

I neither agreed nor disagreed. At that point in time I was very openminded to the ghastly heory you were eveloving to equate Gujarat (by which you mean Godhra also) with Baslan. I only asked you to explain what the “causes” of the various killers were.

Guess what. You copped out. Looks like you don’t want to pursue that line any more. Why, my ghastly emperor? Instead, we are pursuing a smooth line now; no more theories, only the shrill rhetoric of the smooth operator.

Checkening out, Comrade Khanna?

Clarfiy this issue, and we shall move on.

jihadically in solidarity with you.
rr

As an aside:

apparently forgetting that Godhra happens to be IN Gujarat.

But there are lots of places in Guajarat that remained unaffected by violence. So why lump them in the generic category “Gujarat”? At that rate, why not simply refer to that violance as “South Asia”?

Salam alekum, Mujahid.

Btw theres a very good artilce by Martha Nausbam on parallels between the rise of Nazis and the Hinduvta movement.

I am glad that you dislike the Nazis at least, if not the jihadi killers that pumped bullets into fleeing chldrens’ backs.

I’m just wondering: do you know that the Chechens collaborated with the Nazis during WW2?

one of my Indian colleagues made this statement that all Muslims are terrorists.

Hi Jahnvi,

I share your emotion, angst, pain and sentiment. Just yesterday, one of my colleagues said that all Hindus are kaffirs in the eyes of allah and must therefore either be converted to Islam or exterminated. Makes one sick, no?

John V

all Hindus are kaffirs in the eyes of allah
John,
I agree 100% with you that all kinds of such sentiments make me puke n yes scares me! Just one question for you. Are you by any chance try to justify one with the other? Are you saying that just because one of your Muslim colleagues thinks that all Hindus should be exterminated unless they convert to Islam, its okay to label all Muslims as terrorists? Now that is the question. Hindu or Muslim or Christian or Jew is immaterial when it comes to humanity. When will people realise that religion is a personal matter and not try to force their opinions on others?
Seriously concerned,
Jahnvi

All this does not mean that I condone or support any militant group. I dont have any words to express my anguish and sorrow at this dastardly act. Only cowards shoot innocent people, esp children, in the back.

Jahnvi

RR —

Okay, so let’s get the order straight.

One: discussion on Besslan erupts on this blog.

Two: Al-Mujahid and you get into an argument (fine, it’s only sarcasm from you). I’m just watching so far — you know how we ghOsts love watching you, don’t you RR?

Three: During this discussion, Al-Mujahid writes:
Doing killings for getting 72 vigins is not any worse than butchering Muslim Gujaratis for the Monkey/Chimpanzee/Elephant/2 Penised God.

Four: You react to this by writing:
Desperate people do desperate things indeed, like coming up with freaking dubious moral equivalences.

Five: I’ve been watching (still with me on that one?), and now I leap in to ask you:
in what sense was the killing in Gujarat not morally equivalent to the killing in Besslan?

Six: You reply saying I should establish it (the moral equivalence). In a subsequent post, you also say:
I do see lots of differences, comrade Mukta Nair, but we get there after you have firmly established the moral equivalence you have set out to establish.

Seven: So I do establish the equivalence. In two different posts. You are yet to show us where I went wrong. You are yet to show us where you see lots of differences. Are you going to do it now? After all, you latched on to this moral equivalence stuff before I mentioned causes (of which, more below). You said you would tell us the differences after I established the equvalence. So I did establish it, as I see it. So now, RR, tell us the difference between Gujarat and Besslan/WTC/Akshardham/Bombay blasts. I know you can do it! After all, you’re nO ghOst, right?

As for the causes, which I mentioned for the first time during item Seven above: I said of the murders in Besslan that they happened in the name of a cause that had nothing to do with them..

This was using bits of your own language, to wit:
Killing a few hundred of them in the name of Allah the all-merciful… and
the s.o.b’s who massacred on a large scale kids who have nothing to do with any conflct.

So I changed “conflct” to “cause”. Okay, I retract. The murders in Beslan happened in the name of a conflict that had nothing to do with them. Your language, so you’ll agree?

Fine, so now back to our regularly scheduled programming. What is the vast moral gulf, RR? No more cOpOuts, Okay? No more “It takes a lunatic” sort of hand-waving, Okay?

Even you, RR, must get tired of the copOuts. So just buckle dOwn and tell us. How are these various atrocities different? All us ghOsts would like to know, so dO Oblige us. Try hard not to be slippery again.

Sudhakar

To all out there —

The reason I’m trying to pin RR down here is because I really would like to know, why do people (and he’s not the only one) see a difference between the killings in Gujarat and the killings in Besslan or Akshardham or on 9/11? Why are Besslan and Akshardham and 9/11 referred to as terrorism, but the Gujarat slaughter are never called that? Why is Gujarat on a lesser plane of terror and immorality than those other atrocities? Why would RR say that only “lunatics” would “equate” Gujarat with Besslan or 9/11 or Akshardham or Bombay blasts?

What is so lunatic here? I don’t get it atall.

These are serious questions. Even if RR won’t answer them, it would be nice to get some reactions from you others.

The more I think about it, this is what comes to my mind: unless we are willing to treat Gujarat as being as horrible a terrorist attack as WTC or Besslan etc, we will keep suffering terrorism.

Sudhakar Nair

What is so lunatic here? I don’t get it atall.

The last person who is going to give you an answer to that is RR. You see he is not going to find any means to let the sarcasm level in his system ooze out if you stop paying any attention to him. So lets all pretend that we are ghOsts and let RR have his day. As I said elsewhere some things in life you just have to ignore. BTW, lets get on with the debate, shall we?

Why are Besslan and Akshardham and 9/11 referred to as terrorism, but the Gujarat slaughter are never called that?

I am personally leery of any attempt to fit an act of atrocity snugly into some kind of terminology. That in itself is dumbing down the scale of carnage. I mean do you give a shit? Ok.. call it terrorism or pogrom or atrocity or whatever the heck you want to. It is how to respond to such a crisis that matters in the end. Vladimir Putin’s policy in Chechnya has not yielded the expected dividends so far. Has he ever tried to find a political situation to the problem? The Chechens have a legitimate gripe. Stalin brutally murdered most of the Chechen population since he suspected them of being in cahoots with the Nazis during WWII. Now they don’t want to be a part of Russia. Great — Right or wrong, when force doesn’t seem to help what is the point in continuing to act belligerent and making statements like “Weaker ones are always beaten — we should not be weak…” etc? His military approach has only resulted in the increased incidents of terrorist acts in and around Moscow.

Has he ever tried to find a political situation to the problem?

Sorry.. I meant political solution…

HOW DOES KILLING, TRAUMATISING, WOUNDING CHILDREN HELP ONE’S CAUSE, WHATEVER THAT CAUSE MIGHT BE? HOW DID KILLING 3,000 AMERICANS ON SEPTEMBER 11TH MAKE ANYONE’S LIFE BETTER? I AM AS OUTRAGED BY THESE HORRORS AS I WAS BY THE BEHEADINGS OF JOURNALISTS. I DO NOT WANT YOUNG PEOPLE TO DIE BY GOING TO WAR, BUT I WANT THESE HORRORS TO END. WHAT CAN WE DO, WORLD, TO STOP THESE ATROCITIES? HUMAN TO HUMAN, WHAT THE HELL CAN WE DO AS VIGILLANTES? AND WHY AREN’T THERE ANY? WHY CAN’T THERE BE A WHOLE INTERNATIONAL GROUP OF CRAZIES FOR A GOOD CAUSE? TOUGH MOTHER FUCKERS WHO ARE OUTRAGED BY THE INHUMANITY TO THEIR FELLOW MAN & WILL DAMN SURE NOT DIE TO STOP THEIR SHIT. AND PERHAPS SUCH PEOPLE ARE ALREADY IN OUR MILITARY FORCE, AND I PRAY THAT THEY ARE.

Jahnvi —

You should know better than to react to “John V”, whose very name is a play on yours. That’s RR in disguise, too bad it’s an incompetent one. Hey RR, if you’re so keen to pretend all your critics are ghOsts, the least yOu can do is fAke an id better.

Dilip —

Vladimir Putin’s policy in Chechnya has not yielded the expected dividends so far. Has he ever tried to find a political situation to the problem? The Chechens have a legitimate gripe …. His military approach has only resulted in the increased incidents of terrorist acts in and around Moscow.

This is true, and I’ve always thought i applies to Israel too. So many Indians are vapid admirers of Israel’s “tough” policy towards terrorist attacks, and how it is a “hard state”. Yeah, hit back hard andd all that — but is there any less terror in ISrael as a result? Are its people living in peace?

The same re: Chechnya.

Actually, Chechnya’s history of antagonism towards Russia goes back at least 150 years, maybe more. Atrocities in plenty, on both sides. But now it is simple to label the Chechens terrorists, especially Islamic terrorists, and sit back smugly thinking that explains it all. Well sure, smugness is fine, but what’s going to end this problm?

Chechens cozying up to the Nazis in WW2? That’s hardly unusual. So did the Italians and Japs of course, but also the Finns (Russia has always been Finland’s worst enemy). Also our own Netaji, who wanted Hitler’s help to get rid of the Brits.

Sudhakar Nair

Shanti, the whole point of your post has gone waste in this meaningless ranting. What happened at Beslan was a barbaric thing, period!

Anyone who tries to justify shooting kids is fit for being maimed and shot between the eyes, if you ask me!! :angry:

u see whenver terrorist barbaric is condemmed a bunch of people start screaming abt gujrat? http://www.realwomenonline.com/images/smilies/angry.gif

Sameer, no cause in the world is worth 160 kids shot in cold blood. Children are the helpless of the world and if someone is so brutal as to use them to try and further a political gain, they are not worth discussing about, let alone agonized over.

I have sympathy for those who make their plight known - maybe the Russians did horrific things to Chechens - that doesn’t mean a damn thing to the dead children. The Chechens, just like the Palestinians lost their peace the day they decided targeting innocent civilians would somehow help them.

Walekum-asslam RR
Yes I am aware of the Chechnyans being accused of collaborating with the Nazis. I dont think the charges were ever substantiated.
Kill all Muslims
Jai Shree Raam

Nina…you say “PERHAPS SUCH PEOPLE ARE ALREADY IN OUR MILITARY FORCE, AND I PRAY THAT THEY ARE.”

I think there are some. This sounds like one:

http://luckoftheirish_04.blogspot.com/

(scroll down to the Sept 3 post, “light”)

Seven: So I do establish the equivalence. In two different posts.

Crap, my dear ghastly comrade.

Having recklessly ventured to compare the respective “causes” the respective killers were fighting for, you begin to backpedal furiously when asked to elaborate, and when I exposed your duplicity on how you do NOT treat Godhra and Gujarat as being morally equivalent. Or for that matter how you do not treat Marxist killings in Kerala and WB as morally equivalent to Gujarat riots. At this point in time you begin to engage in that which you have no doubt exhibited consummate skill in: bluster, verbal jugglery and shrill rhetoric.

You haven’t established any moral equivalence. You set out establish statistical equivalence maybe, numbers killed etc, but that’s about it.

Lay it off, ain’t working.

Cheers,
RR

Vinay —

whenver terrorist barbaric is condemmed a bunch of people start screaming abt gujrat?

What I was getting at. Why do you see a diffrence between Gujarat and other terrorist barbaric acts? Gujarat was terrorism and barbarism, period.

Shanti—

if someone is so brutal as to use them (children) to try and further a political gain, they are not worth discussing about, let alone agonized over. …. The Chechens, just like the Palestinians lost their peace the day they decided targeting innocent civilians would somehow help them.

In that case, pretty much every single cause or war in the world, throughout history, must be dismissed. Children and innocent civilians have been both used and targets in conflicts always.

Examples? Carthage: Romans slaughtered the entire city when they conquered it. Crusades: the so-called “Christian” countries sent an entire children’s crusade (called as such) to their slaughter in the Middle-East. WW1: Kids were used on the fronts by all countries. WW2: Kids died in concentration camps; Germany used young boys in the final defence of Berlin; Soviet soldiers slaughtered kids and raped women by the thousands when they overran Berlin; many other examples. Vietnam: Americans killed civilians including kids all through, My-Lai just the most prominent example. Gujarat: kids and women were not spared in the slaughter. Sierra Leone and Liberia: child soldiers are a well-documented feature of the recent wars there, known to be particularly brutal and also known to kill non-combatant kids with glee. Rwanda: an entire people nearly wiped out.

So you are actually making a valid point: the causes that inspire this kind of killing are not worth discussing. In other words: the problem is conflict itself. As soon as people start fighting each other, “innocents” are going to be killed. Kids included.

Sudhakar Nair.

Chechens cozying up to the Nazis in WW2? That’s hardly unusual.

As also commies in India, before they effected a volte-face following Russia’s involvement in the war.

Point is, my ghastly-moral-equivalence-comrade, let’s not forget that the Nazi connection of Chechens was brought out in the context of our Mujahid’s mention of some Marxist lunatic’s thesis that Hindutva are Nazis. I mean, guys far removed from events in Europe are Nazis, but those who actively collaborated with Nazis during WW-2 — the Chechens, the Indian marxists — aren’t? You who desperate to see a moral equivalence between communal riots and terrorist masscares— you see nothing morally abominable about Chechens cozying up to Nazis? Nothing unusual? And you have the gall to sermoze others on moral equivalences?

Where did you pick up your morals, comrade? Just curious.

RR/John V—

Don’t you get tired of being slippery?

Here’s the simple question. Exactly why is what happened in GUjarat NOT morally equatable to Besslan?

Sudhakan

In that case, pretty much every single cause or war in the world, throughout history, must be dismissed.

Yeah. That’s how let’s rationalize the massacre of children in Baslan.

Examples? Carthage: Romans slaughtered the entire city when they conquered it.

That’s rich coming from somebody who puts on a mighty show of “moral” indignation on communal riots in Gujarat. Ghazni massacred the entire population of Somnath. The entire population of the city of Vijayanagar was put to sword: the city was burning constinuously for 6 months, on some accounts. The Muslim conquest of India, by the accounts of some (non-“Eminent”, aka Marxist-fundametalist) historians, is the bloodiest chapter in history, a holocuast predating the 20th century one by several hundred years. It is said that wherever Khlji went he made piles of skulls of infidels. Of course some women and children were not killed, so they could be kept as concubines or sold as slaves in the middle-east. Thank the invaders for small mercies what.

So you are actually making a valid point: the causes that inspire this kind of killing are not worth discussing

Having said this, and then donnig his other mask, comrade goes on to maintain that the Chechens had “gievances”.

It’s fun talking to you deat ghastly Dilip Khanna. I don’t have to disprove you; you do it yourself all the time.

Cheers,
RR

Exactly why is what happened in GUjarat NOT morally equatable to Besslan?

Back to being smooth, comrade Mukta Menon?

You ARE the one who’s seeing a moral equivalence. Establish it.

Cheers,
RR

Jahnvi —

You should know better than to react to “John V”, whose very name is a play on yours

Ghastly,

Are you generally in the habit of talking to yourself on internet forums like this? Or is this a one-off instance? Curious.

Cheers,
RR

Are you by any chance try to justify one with the other? Are you saying that just because one of your Muslim colleagues thinks that all Hindus should be exterminated unless they convert to Islam, its okay to label all Muslims as terrorists?

Jahnvi, I am appalled by your attitude! These are very leading questions which are deeply offensive. Do you always consider yourself as being a noble person, and others as of suspect intentions? When you quoted your Indian colleague on Muslims, did you intend to tar all Indians (ie, Hindus) with the same anti-Muslim brush? Did you intend to use that tarring to justify massacres like Beslan? Is that why you are seeing “justification” in my response to your post?

Bemused,
John V.

You should know better than to react to “John V”, whose very name is a play on yours

Sudhakar,

Why do you suppose that everybody must adopt the same methods as you?

I agree with Gavaskar. Sudhakar is trying to create the impression that the whole populations are solidly behind him.

Dilip V

To RR, Dilip, Gavaskar et al,

I have a valid email ID and blog, please do visit it. I dont know anyone in this comment box, just happened to visit it from another blog.

Secondly RR, I am an Indian myself, what makes you think that I would tar all Indians (and consequently myself) with any kind of bigoted brush? I was appalled by the statement I had mentioned along with the one you or John V did. All I want to say is lets not generalize and club people as terrorists because of their religion.

What happened in Beslan is a blot on humanity and anyone and everyone in the right minds would denounce it. This has only alienated the Chechens and they have lost all the sympathy for their cause, if any.

Enough said,
Jahnvi.

Sudhakar, of all the examples you mentioned, how many times did the side killing children win?

Shanti—

of all the examples you mentioned, how many times did the side killing children win?

Rome over Carthage, definitely.

Crusades: the “Christians” won some, lost more, overall they are generally considered a defeat for “Christians”.

WW1: Who “won” this absurd, brutal war? I have no idea. Every side spent four years slaughtering each other, then the Germans signed a surrender they didn’t believe in.

WW2: Germany lost. Soviets decidedly on winning side. As cited above, both indulged in horrific killing of civilians/children.

Vietnam: US lost.

Gujarat: Who “won” this? What I do know, despite horrible atrocities his government did nothing to stop, Modi won an election months later.

Sierra Leone/Liberia: both countries in a godawful bloody mess.

Rwanda: Hutus slaughtered Tutsis, then got driven out by RPF (mainly Tutsis) who did their own killings (though largely of the Hutu combatants).

Those are the examples I listed.

Sudhakar.

My point Sudhakar, was that the side killing children never really wins - even when they appear to have won, the wins are temporary (see, Soviet Union).

Ultimately, people recognize monsters regardless of the guise they wear and the cause they espouse. Once the line between human and subhuman is crossed, I think there is absolutely no more hope for the cause.

Secondly RR, I am an Indian myself, what makes you think that I would tar all Indians (and consequently myself) with any kind of bigoted brush?

That Indian colleague of yours who claimed that all Muslims are tesrrorists — is he Muslim? Christian? At least a Jew?

This has only alienated the Chechens and they have lost all the sympathy for their cause, if any.

That “if any” tailing your sentence is the first sensible thing you said.

In my opinion, a “cause” is only as legitimate as the means used to advance it. I accept even violence as a legitimate means — provided combatants fight combatants within the framework of rules of war. Failing that, only peaceful means are legitimate. Gandhi fought the British with a commitment to non-violence that bordered on the fetish; ditto with Dalai Lama who is peacefully resisting the brutalization of Tibet by communist China.

“One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom-fighter” is a slogan collectively of Islamic fundamentalists,the lunatic fringe of the Left and assorted terrorism-justifying scumbags.

Shanti —

the side killing children never really wins - even when they appear to have won, the wins are temporary (see, Soviet Union). Ultimately, people recognize monsters regardless of the guise they wear and the cause they espouse. Once the line between human and subhuman is crossed, I think there is absolutely no more hope for the cause.</i?

I see what you are saying and I’d like to think that’s true. But unfortunately, it isn’t. Rome removed Carthage and its people from the face of the earth, what happened to them? Rome’s final collapse came centuries later and had nothing to do with what they did in Carthage.

What about WW1? What about Gujarat: not only are horrible killings left unpunished, we even have a government riding them to power, we even have people claiming they weren’t so horrible after all. What about Sierra Leone?

Take even Besslan and Cechnya, where we started all this from. The world has lost all sympathy for the Chechen cause because of BEsslan, and therefore Chechnya will lose the war, you think? Well, Russia has committed widespread atrocities in Chechnya dating back almost two centuries. Like the Romans, they razed entire towns and villages in the 1800s — long before the Soviet Union. In fact the Chechens came to see the Russians as exactly your word, subhuman, for the atrocities they were committing. You’d think, as you say, after such atrocities there should have been “no more hope” for the Russian cause.

But here we are in 2004, and not only is the conflict still on, now we’re all saying it’s the Chechens who have lost the world’s sympathy because of their Besslan atrocity. (Note that the Chechens were just as brutal in fighting back at the Russians in the 1800s).

The point about this conflict is, the roots go back centuries, the slaughter goes back centuries. However horrible Besslan is, and it is horrible, it is simplistic to see it in isolation, apart from the context of centuries of mutual and virulent hatred.

Sudhakar.

Shanti—

I wanted to add just a little more context about Cechnya/Russia.

In the 1940s, Stalin conducted a pogrom against the Chechens that killed one-third, yes one-third, of the population of Chechnya and deported most of the rest.

Fifty years later, in the 1990s, Russia’s war against Chechnya killed over one hundred thousand Chechens, and turned a quarter-million more into refugees. At the time, Chechnya’s total population was just about a million.

Sudhakar.

RR,
Jai Shree Ram
Finally the truth is out. The Indian Muslims ( they all secretly hold Pakistani Passports) are breeding at a much higher rate than our Hindu (Real Indians) population. Do you think its time we adopt our own Nation Wide ‘final solution’ for these over sexed Muzzies. Honorable Shree Modi has already shown us how popular this strategy is for winning elections. At a time when our nation is under a grave threat from these 141 million ISI agents we all should take inspirated from a strong leader like Hitler ( Our beloved Sena supremo Thackeray idolizes him and so do numerous others in our Nationalist Hinduvta movement)
In solidarity with the innocence of Uma Bhartee
Al Mujahid

inspirated* - inspiration

Lallahoos comrade Nair.

In the 1940s, Stalin conducted a pogrom against the Chechens that killed one-third

I just wanted to draw your attention to similarities of tactics of Nazis, Marxist terrorists and Islamic terrorists. By all accounts, communism was the biggest genocidal infuence of 20th century, surpassing even, in fact, Nazism. Stalin’s treatment of Chechans is a testament to that fact. Likewise, Islamic fundamentalism was the biggest genocidal influence that India suffered, and its threat continues to hover us to this day.

What is remarkable therefore, is the similarities in tactics between Nazis, Marxists and Islamic terrorists. The Nazis “exiled” Jews to concentration camps. Marxists “exiled” “class enemies” of various kinds to various places. And in this modern age, Islamic terrorists claiming to fight for Kashmir’s “freedom” have “exiled” the valley’s minority to outside of the valley. All these three genocidal ideologies have used not only mass killing, but also ethnic cleansing as a tool of oppression.

In the context of your dubious moral equivalences, I thought these similarities between Marxists, Islamic terrorists and Nazis might help to deliver you some enlightenment.

Cheers,
RR

Russian civilians killed by Chechnyans in the last 10 years - 1100
Chechyans civilians killed by Russian armed forces in the last 10 years - 115,000

The point about this conflict is, the roots go back centuries, the slaughter goes back centuries. However horrible Besslan is, and it is horrible, it is simplistic to see it in isolation, apart from the context of centuries of mutual and virulent hatred.

I think history is a convenient excuse to justify these non-stop killings. Think about it Nair. For all practical purposes Boris Yelstin had granted pseudo-autonomy to Chechnya. What possessed Putin conduct a full scale invasion on Chechnya in 1999? Don’t you think he simply woke up sleeping dogs?

Lallahoos Mujahid-bhai,

The Indian Muslims ( they all secretly hold Pakistani Passports) are breeding at a much higher rate than our Hindu (Real Indians) population. Do you think its time we adopt our own Nation Wide ‘final solution’ for these over sexed Muzzies.

I am not for complicated solutions that might appeal to bin Laden types. There are far simpler and civilized solutions. Here is what Indian Muslims can do:

1. Practice family-planning; stop believing that Allah wants one to have a huge family.

2. The Mullas, instead of using friday sermons to deliver political speeches that generally work up the faithful into rage against events in kashmir, chechnya and Palestine, can use the occassion to deal with the problems of here and now: they can provide the devout with liberal interpretations of the scripture that suggest that it is okay to limit the number of children to two.

3. The Urdu media can do its bit in popularizing the small family norm.

4. Press for uniform civil code and equitable justice for women.

RR/John V—

Still not tired of being slippery, or is that slippeRRy?

Here’s the simple question. Exactly why is what happened in Gujarat NOT morally equatable to Besslan?

yOur ghOstly friend,
Sudhakar Nair.

Still not tired of being slippery, or is that slippeRRy?

Nair.. I know its difficult. But try — repeat after me — IGNORE, IGNORE, IGNORE, IGNORE, ad infinitum…

RR, you still havnt answered the question on why equating the Gujarat pogrom to the Beslan tragedy is a dubious equivalence

Dear Ghastly,

Still not tired of being slippery, or is that slippeRRy?

Earlier the taunt used to be “Are you copping out?” or something to that effect. After copping out from elaborating the “causes” that the various fighters are fighting for, your record now seems stuck at the above line.

Here’s the simple question. Exactly why is what happened in Gujarat NOT morally equatable to Besslan

Go ahead establish that moral equivalence visible to you in cinema-scope.

Cheers,
RR

Dilip,
Putin invaded Chechnya because he campaigned and won the election on a ‘getting tough policy ‘with Chechnya and he promised to bring back Chechnya completely under Russian control.
You also said “For all practical purposes Boris Yelstin had granted pseudo-autonomy to Chechnya”
Didnt Yeltsin authorize a full scale invasion of Grozny which lead to Military Defeat and withdrawl. Yeltsin never gave the Chechnyans any autonomy. Infact he ignored them for 3 years and refused to even talk or negotiate with them. After that he invaded them.

” After copping out from elaborating the “causes” that the various fighters are fighting for”…..The Chechnyans are fighting for Independence. Their cause is ‘independence’ from Russia. The fact that some Arabs have joined the Chechnyans, Ingush fighters does not change the nature of the conflict.
The Hinduvta Brigade in Gujarat however was engaged in a Communist or Nazi style pogrom.

Dilip—

Actually, the 1990s Russin war on Chechna was 94-96.

I am not knowledgeable enough about what happened under Yelstin and Putin, and this autonomy you mention. But my limited understanding is that when the USSR died, Chechnya declared (or wanted) independence in exactly the same way Lithuania, or Kazakhstan, or any of the other ex-Soviet republics did. Being a tiny piece of land locked deep inside the Russian landmass (if my geog. is correct), nobody paid it much attention. The Russians refused to give them independence. Fallout is what we see today.

Oh yes, IGNORE! I must give it a try. Isn’t it delightful, though? After first denying an equivalence between Guj and Besslan, our fRRiend uses every smokescreen possible to evade telling us why he denies it; and the smokesceens themselves give him away.

What about you others out there? Shanti? Jahnvi? Sameer? Do you see a moral difference between slaughter of innocent people in Gujarat and in Besslan? If yes, what is that difference?

Sudhakar.

After first denying an equivalence between Guj and Besslan, our fRRiend uses every smokescreen possible to evade telling us why he denies it; and the smokesceens themselves give him away.

Arre Comrade,

Why bluff and bluster if you got logic? Even our whats-the-big-deal-in-killing-kids Mujahid-bhai made a feeble attempt at proving a moral equivalence. Can’t you try at least that much?

Cheers,
RR

Comrade Mujahid,

Let’s settle this one first before we even start detecting an equivalence. All you actually proved is that there is NO moral equivalnce.

The Chechnyans are fighting for Independence.

We are not discussing Chechens. We are disussing the motives of those who pupmped bullets into 10-year olds.

Their cause is ‘independence’ from Russia.

Of Arabs? Africans? Pakistanis? Al Qaeda? What have they got to do with “Chechen” independence?

The fact that some Arabs have joined the Chechnyans, Ingush fighters does not change the nature of the conflict.

Because you say so?

Its not because I say so. To say otherwise would be nonsensical. The Chechnyan ‘terrorists’ have a cause. Their cause is ‘Independence’ from Russia. There are no Pakistanis or Africans fighting in Chechnya. Putin claims that some of the terrorists in Beslan were ‘Arabs’. So because a few Arabs decided to join the Chechnyans in taking over the school, it does mean that the Chechnyans attacked the school on an Al Qaeda ideology of killing all Westerners. The operation as far as we know was planned and carried out by Chechnyans. Their motive was their conflict with Russia. The Chechnyans have never attacked Westerners. Infact in the Theater attack, the Chechnyans had released all Westerners.
When the Afghans were fighting the Soviets, the US and other Arab mujahidDEEN were supporting the Afghans. However that did not change the cause. The cause remained of fighting the Soviets. Likewise just because a few arabs joined the Chechnyans, it does not mean that the Chechnyans attacked the school to punish all infidels.

The operation as far as we know was planned and carried out by Chechnyans. Their motive was their conflict with Russia

This point needs emphasis. al-Qaeda has always tried to (in some cases even successfully) bunch all these local insurgencies into some kind of worldwide jihadi movement and claim that the war is against infidels. If anything Putin has used this as an excuse to conclude that he is battling international terrorism much the same way Bush has. To the best of my knowledge Chechens have nothing against westerners and this is nothing but a secessionist movement gone awfully awry because of Russian armed forces’ horrible brutality towards the Chechen population for almost a decade. That wayward war lords like Shamil Basayev have used this opportunity to recruit Islamic mercenaries fresh from Afghan (after tangling with the Soviets) only goes to prove what a bad precedent George Bush has set with his all-or-nothing approach.

shanti started blog topic for condeming baselan barbarism. not for ur pro terrorist propoganda.

Sudhakar, you are trying to explain the Chechen terrorism by saying you need to put it in historical context and not look at it as an isolated incident…

By the same token, should we also not look at the Gujarat incidents in historical context as the Hindu resentment that has been built up over decades and centuries of oppression by the Muslim rulers and then the favoritism and special status given to them by politicians to sustain vote banks? The division of India into three different countries because of Muslim demands and the massacre of Bengalis in East Pakistan, don’t you think Hindus have as much right to feel oppressed as Chechens?

I am not condoning violence on civilians in any context regardless of the perpetrators - I am just pointing out that you are asking us to consider the history of one brand of terrorism (justified or not) while ignoring the same in another case.

I think a context is needed when theres an escalation in violence in an ongoing conflict and not a revenge for a 6 centuries old grudge.

Al Mujahid, the Hindu-Muslim problem in India is an ongoing conflict - our independence and the partition riots were a mere 60 years ago. East Pakistan became Bangladesh over the dead bodies of thousands of Bengali men and raped women a mere 30 years ago. We are struggling to create laws that will treat all citizens equally regardless of religion - this conflict is nowhere close to being an old grudge.

I dont think its the same at all. More Muslims than Hindus died both in the Partition and in Bangladesh. So why would the Gujarati Hindus be so violently upset ? I think Ghodra is a better example of putting Gujarat in some context than the Partition or 71. Plus you have missed a very important point. Bengali Hindus and Bengali Muslims were both killed by Pakistanis and not by Gujarati Muslims (and there are no reports to suggest that Gujarati Muslims were aiding the Pakistanis in 71) The Chechnyans killed Russians who were killing Chechnyans. How can that equate to Hindus killings Muslim in India over what the Pakistanis did to Bangla Muslims and Bangla Hindus in Bangladesh 30 years back.
Also presuming that Indian Muslims = Pakistanis and Indian Hindus = Hindu Bengalis it still doesnt equate. After the Bangla War, the violence did not continue. The war was over. Gujarati or Bengalis are not living under a brutal occupation. In Chechnya theres an ongoing conflict. Chechnya is under a brutal occupation as I write this piece. Check www.hrw.org or www.amnestyinternational.com for whats happening in Chechnya as we speak right now. Surely you cant equate that to Gujarati Hindus concern for what happened to Banglas in 71.
Also striving for creating a Uniform Civil Code cannot be compared to the occupation and killings of 100,000 plus Chechnyans.

Shanti and RR, I dont know much about the Indian Common Law ( I am presuming theres Common Law in India) Could you please point out which specific laws of the Civil Sharia are offensive to the Indian Hindus, which they want to be replaced by the Indian Common Law. As I understand isnt there a sepepate Hindu Law and Christian Law as well in India . So would all laws be replaced by the Indian Common Law ? Would the new Indian Common Law be taken from Western Law or Hindu Law or from some other place. I am asking because I am not well informed on the debate of the Uniform Civil Code.

By the same token, should we also not look at the Gujarat incidents in historical context as the Hindu resentment that has been built up over decades and centuries of oppression by the Muslim rulers and then the favoritism and special status given to them by politicians to sustain vote banks?

Come on Shanti. In that part of history, i.e 6-10 centuries ago, we were in the Dark Ages. All people knew was how to invade each other to establish supremacy over one another — because that is the only way anybody could survive. Forget muslim rulers — do you know the scale of havoc inflicted by Genghis Khan? The Mongol hordes were simply unstoppable all the way till the heart of Europe. The Huns single-handedly destroyed the mighty Roman empire. If you take that part of history into account Italy, France and other European countries esp. Hungary has to go to war with Mongolia.

The division of India into three different countries because of Muslim demands and the massacre of Bengalis in East Pakistan, don’t you think Hindus have as much right to feel oppressed as Chechens?

Massacre, yes but it was Pakistan’s armed forces that effected the carnage. If I remember right most of the East Pakistan’s population fled to West Bengal. I don’t know what parallel you are trying to draw here with the Chechen-Russian conflict.

AM and Dilip, I am not the one drawing parallels between Gujarat and Besslan - it was Sudhakar. I am merely trying to show him the flaw in his logic. Remember, I did not bring up the topic of Gujarat here.

I don’t care if the Chechnyans do have legitimate grievances; that does not excuse this particular act.

Anyway, the Chechnyans had a period of limited autonomy in the 90s and really messed it up. They invaded Dagestan (?sp). The Chechyan separatists are a heterogenous group including militants, Islamists, plain old thugs and drug dealers who would like power.

Nothing excuses the barbarity of Beslan. Nothing. If it is wrong for the Russians to target Chechnyans it’s wrong the other way round too.

Come on Shanti. In that part of history, i.e 6-10 centuries ago, we were in the Dark Ages

Lallahoos my smooth-tongued comrade. My take my hats off respectfully in admiration of the elaborate spin you’re spinning to justify the “context” for the massacre of kids at Baslan alone as genuine.

You go to extreme lengths, and write reams to put the latest act of pumping bullets into children into an alleged “context”, but the moment Shanti asks you a tough one on context leading up to Godhra riots, get hypercritical.

It’s only 300 years since the most bigoted of Mughal rulers, Aurangzeb, died Comrade. He did such a fine job of completing the work of his predecessors that the oldest functioning temples in North India happen to be no more than 300 years ols; ie, constrcuted after the scumbag died. Contrast that with the number of standing, functioning 1000-yeard old temples in the South.

To put that in perspective, the conquest of Chechanya by the Tsar, which figures big in your “context” buling leading upto the massacre of children at Baslan, happened onyl 150 years after Aurangzeb died.

It is only 60 years since JInnah called for “direct action” killing thousands of Hindus.

It is only a few decades since the HIndu population of Pakistan has been brought down from 10% to less than 1%. And even as we speak, the task of cleansing Bangladesh of Hindus is going on.

It is barely 15 years since Kashmir valley has been ethnically cleansed of Hindus.

I’m beginning to wonder what sort of characters am I debating moral equivalences with. No doubt you recceived instrcution in ethics at the local wahabi madrassa?

Massacre, yes but it was Pakistan’s armed forces that effected the carnage

Smoothie, Pakistan’s armed forces consisted of Muslims. Their victims consisted largely of East Bengal’s Hindus.

I don’t know what parallel you are trying to draw here with the Chechen-Russian conflict.

Your innocence is touching Smoothie. Having seen moral equivalences between Godhra and Baslan, have you suddenly developed allergy to that parallel?

There are no Pakistanis or Africans fighting in Chechnya.

THat sounds a bit like Musharraf claiming that there are no Pakistanis killing innocents in India, only “freedom fighters”.

Russia, just like India, accusing Pakistan of bankrolling and training the Chechen terrorists.

The bodies of black terrorists were found.

Reoprts of Al Qaeda’s links with Chechens have been published.

Putin claims that some of the terrorists in Beslan were ‘Arabs’

So? Would you rather that I believe the claims of terrorists than Putin’s?

Their motive was their conflict with Russia.

Why did then the terrorists threaten to kill only non-Muslim kids? They shouldn’t be discrminating Russians in their pious act of killing for “independence”, no?

Anyway, the Chechnyans had a period of limited autonomy in the 90s and really messed it up.

The issue is the massacre at Baslan, not “Chechen independence”, period. The relationship between these two is tenuous at best, as much as between 9/11 and “american foreign policy”, the valiant efforts of context-building smoothies notwithstanding.

Regards,
RR

Finally there’s some debating here! Instead of just sarcasm back and forth. Thank you Shanti, and I mean that.

Okay Shanti— you say you are trying to point out the flaw in my logic. Good, that’s what I was asking for. I wanted someone to tell me why Besslan and Gujarat are not morally the same (or maybe I should sya IMmorally the same), whereas I can see no difference between them.

So you say:
should we also not look at the Gujarat incidents in historical context as the Hindu resentment that has been built up over decades and centuries….

But of course Gujarat must be seen in a historical context. I never claimed otherwise, nor am I doing so now, and I would be a fool to suggest that the violence there in 2002 happened out of nowhere. This is one part of my point: that there’s historical context for these horrors. In Besslan, in Gujarat.

There is Hindu resentment and I would be just as much of a fool to pretend it doesn’t exist.

I am just pointing out that you are asking us to consider the history of one brand of terrorism (justified or not) while ignoring the same in another case.

I am not ignoring it at all. This is the other part of my point. I’m trying to suggest exactly what you are suggesting here — both events are acts of terrorism. Morally equivalent. That’s all. I don’t say Gujarat was worse than Besslan, I’m arguing with those who try to say Gujarat was somehow LESS horrible than Besslan (and there have been many such people, not just restricted to this discussion).

You kill innocents, that’s terrorism to me. Whether Gujarat or Besslan or 9/11 or the Bombay blasts or Rwanda or the Bombay riots or Akshardham or the ‘84 Sikh carnage. What grates on those who want to find differences between Gujarat and BEsslan is to have Gujarat be called terrorism. Because they would prefer to believe that terrorism is something practiced only by those nefarious Islamic people — you know, Chechens, Arabs, Pakistanis, Indian Muslims, etc.

Perish the thought that even other Indians are spreading terror. But think about it: what did the people in Gujarat feel as they approached their deaths in one ghastly way or another — whether burned to death in a coach or sliced up with swords? Was it not terror?

don’t you think Hindus have as much right to feel oppressed as Chechens?

Now here, I have to disagree. There is a historical context, yes. There is resentment at favoritism and vote bank politics, yes. But to conclude “oppression” from that is rather a leap.

After all, have you stopped to think that Muslims feel resentments too? For one thing, at the uncomfortable fact that in every single riot in India, both more Muslims are killed than Hindus and more Muslims are arrested than Hindus. Should they feel oppressed?

The latest census shows there are six Hindus to evey Muslim in India. How a gang of power-hungry politicians have managed to make it sound reasonable to so many of this overwhelming majority that they must feel “oppressed” by such a minority is one of the great mysteries of modrn Indian history. (In Chechnya, there’s some one million of them versus 100+ million Russians! Quite a different ratio).

Let’s take a couple of angles to this. Im Hindu. My wife is. Both our families are. None of us, going into our extended families, feel this “oppression”, while still recognizing the historical context we discussed above. We have any number of Hindu friends, and none of them feel it either. Are we not part of this “Hindus” you mention who are supposed to be feeling “oppressed”? And if not, and if I know there are great numbers who feel similarly un-oppressed, what is this “oppression” that is being sought to be flung over all Hindus like some musty blanket?

And let’s take you. In what sense do you, I presume a Hindu, feel oppressed today?

I got into an argument once with someone who said this and said Hindus were “Second class citizens”. So I asked him: Okay, has someone taken away your passport? Your right to vote? Your ration card? Your access (or lack!) to law? Your phone connection? Exactly what is it that makes you a second class citzen?

What is it in your case, Shanti, that makes you feel oppressed? You live in Dallas, you have a child, a probably comfy life. Where is this oppression?

To me, it seems that a whole set of politicians discovered the political power in selling Hindus the idea that they are being oppressed today. So they went about doing it, and sure enough, it took them all the way to Delhi.

But look at the blood they left in their wake.

But to return to where we begagn this: all I’m trying to establish is that Gujarat is just as morally repugnant as Beslan, and it is good that you agree. Good not because I feel good, but because as I think I mentioned earlier, I think the only way we will ever manage to free ourselves of terrorism is by seeing it wherever it happens. In Gujarat as in Besslan.

Sudhakar.

And let’s take you. In what sense do you, I presume a Hindu, feel oppressed today?

Lallahoos Comrade.

To begin with, I feel oppressed by the fact that a huge part of my cultural heritage — the temples for example — is not available to me taoday, because it was vandfalized by barbarians.

I feel oppressed by the fact that my coreligionists have been ethnically cleanased out of Kashmir valley.

I feel oppressed by the fact that my coreligionists have been wiped out of the parts of the subcontinet where they were in significant numbers not long ago.

I feel oppressed by the fact that whereas Hindus have been liquidated from Pakistan, are in the process of being liquidated from Bangladesh, the Islamists and Marxists are busy paiting a halo of victimhood around Indian Muslims even though their population is growing at an astonishing rate.

I feel oppressed by the fact that mosques are sitting on top of some of holiest of holy Hindu sites.

Do you want to decide what I should feel oppressed by Comrade Moraluddin?

Cheers,
RR

Finally there’s some debating here! Instead of just sarcasm back and forth. Thank you Shanti, and I mean that.

You are being sarcastic, Comrade Moraluddin.

The debate here was about condeming the Baslan barbarians UNEQUIVOCALLY. Not to project them, a la Comrade Musharraf, as “freedom fighters”. Or to construct dubious equivalences intended to diminish the magnitude of the crime.

Shanti, how about a new blog entry: “Freedom fighters, my ass!”? ;-)

Cheers,
RR

Cheers,
RR

To me, it seems that a whole set of politicians discovered the political power in selling Hindus the idea that they are being oppressed today.

Projecting Muslims as vicitms is the biggest scam in the world today, Comrade. Any number of jerks will line up to tell you that 9/11 victims brought it on themselves due to “american policies”, the Baslan kids bought it on themsleves due to “putin’s policies” etc. There is nary a single episode of Muslim victimization of non-Muslims emphatically attributed to Muslims. To avoid discussion going in that direction, tactics of verbal intimidation are adopted: “are you claiming that all Muslims are terrorists?” etc.

Sorry; you can fool some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

Cheers,
RR

I got into an argument once with someone who said this and said Hindus were “Second class citizens”. So I asked him: Okay, has someone taken away your passport?


On similar lines, Ghastly, some moron once argued with me that Muslims in India are being “persecuted”. So I gave him hard facts.

Pakistan: Hindus persecuted, drop to 1% from 10%.
Bangladesh: ditto. 25% to 8%
Kashmir: Ditto: Expelled out of Kashmir valley.
India: Muslims grow from 9.5% to 13.5%

Is this “persecution of minorities” in India? I asked him. The moron had no answer.

Cheers,
RR

Let’s take a couple of angles to this. Im Hindu. My wife is. Both our families are. None of us, going into our extended families, feel this “oppression”

I have a friend. Muslim. He says that talk of “freedom movement” in Chechenya is all bs, meant to justify terrorism. Ditto with Palestine too, he says.

Cheers,
RR

Oh, Comrade, I might add that he sounds very convincing to me, given Musharraf’s “freedom fight” we are experiencing in Kashmir.

Cheers,
RR

How a gang of power-hungry politicians have managed to make it sound reasonable to so many of this overwhelming majority that they must feel “oppressed” by such a minority is one of the great mysteries of modrn Indian history

Extend this logic further, Mr Moraluddin Ghastly. Muslims are the second largest religious community in the world, and by their own boisterous claims, are the “fastest-growing” religion in the world, like they are some restaurant chain. Most every Muslim-majority country is for Muslims only; non-Muslims are second class citizens.

So how a gang of Islamic fundamentalists and power-hungry Marxist fanatics have managed to make it sound reasonable to so many Muslims that they must feel “oppressed” must remian one of the great mysteries of modrn times, no? Even Pra-non-fool Bidwai claims that Bush’s war on terror is a targetting of Islam!

Cheers,
RR

You kill innocents, that’s terrorism to me

Classic example of how demagogues build dubious moral equivalences: redefining words to suit their politics.

A robber kills an innocent victim he intended to rob. It is not described as terrorism. We distinguish between various kinds of homicide precisely because they are morally-loaded in different ways.

Your moral sense seems as finely evolved as that of Pakistan Times, Ghastly. Here’s Daniel Pipes for ya, enjoy.

——

The press, however, generally shies away from the word terrorist, preferring euphemisms. Take the assault that led to the deaths of some 400 people, many of them children, in Beslan, Russia, on September 3. Journalists have delved deep into their thesauruses, finding at least twenty euphemisms for terrorists:

* Assailants - National Public Radio.
* Attackers – the Economist.
* Bombers – the Guardian.
* Captors – the Associated Press.
* Commandos – Agence France-Presse refers to the terrorists both as “membres du commando” and “commando.”
* Criminals - the Times (London).
* Extremists – United Press International.
* Fighters – the Washington Post.
* Group – the Australian.
* Guerrillas: in a New York Post editorial.
* Gunmen – Reuters.
* Hostage-takers - the Los Angeles Times.
* Insurgents – in a New York Times headline.
* Kidnappers – the Observer (London).
* Militants – the Chicago Tribune.
* Perpetrators – the New York Times.
* Radicals – the BBC.
* Rebels – in a Sydney Morning Herald headline.
* Separatists – the Christian Science Monitor.

And my favorite:

* Activists – the Pakistan Times.

http://www.danielpipes.org/article/2066

Because they would prefer to believe that terrorism is something practiced only by those nefarious Islamic people

Thank you for giving me an opportunity to be politically incorrect, Mr Moraluddin.

All Muslims, definitely, are not terrorists. But, as of now, the overwhelming majority of world’s terrorists are Muslim. Deal with that inconvenient fact, without seeking relief and comfort in trickery like redefining words.

Meanwhile, here’s Lewis Carroll for ya, enjoy.

——

“‘I don’t know what you mean by “glory,”’ Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. ‘Of course you don’t- till I tell you. I meant “there’s a nice knock-down argument for you!”’

‘But ‘glory’ doesn’t mean “a nice knock-down argument,”’ Alice objected.

“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what I choose it to mean- neither more nor less.’

‘The question is,’ said Alice, ‘whether you can make words mean so many different things.”

‘The question is,’ said Humpty Dumpty, ‘which is to be master- that’s all.’

—-

Cheers,
RR

At least one other person sees no difference between the carnage on 9/11 and in Gujarat in 2002. This quote is from Salman Rushdie’s “Step Across the Line” (Modern Library 2002):

“Look what’s being done in the name of God right now. Whether it’s planes flying into buildings or children being burned alive in Gujarat, India, the fact that it’s done in God’s name is a serious part of the problem, because it appears to give people a moral validation for immoral acts. Religion is the poison of the blood.”

Raligion makes people do some god-awful things.

Sudhakar.

MD, you said it best - this is a horrible thing and all I want to do is condemn it completely and totally. I don’t care what the history on this is - I don’t care how (il)legitimate the grievances are - I don’t care if Russia ethnically cleansed all the Chechenyans.

The minute they lifted their guns to shoot a starving, naked, scared, fleeing, innocent child in the back, they lost any claim to morals or causes. I am saying this as a parent who read the news with my baby in my lap.

Does anyone really think a parent who watched his child shot in the back while trying to run to him is going to want peace with the terrorists?

I think we are not discussing Belsan anymore or are we :smartass:
RR raises 3 general points on why the Hindus in India feel oppressed
(1) Actions of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis in the shape of as he says ethnic cleansing of Hindus…..
Is it fair that the Indian Muslims should be held responsible for the actions of foreign governments ? So a poor farmer in a village in Gujarat who has never left her villlage should have her baby plucked out of her womb and then get raped and burnt by a dozen men because of the ‘ethnic cleansing’ policies of the Governments of Pakistan and Bangladesh ? I think this argument holds no merit and its not even worth discussing unless we start with the presumption that the Indian Muslims should be responsible for the actions of foreign governments which happen to be Islamic. By that logic I guess the Armenians should now start killing Indian Muslims because of what the Ottomans did to the Armenians in WW1
(2) Treatment of Kashmiri Pandits
I think Hindus do have some legitimate grievances on the ethnic cleansing of Kashmiri Pandits in Kashmir. I am not aware of statistics on how much the Indian Muslims are providing support to the Kashmiri Muslims in their ethnic cleansing of the Kashmiri Pandits.
Also as I understand most Indian Muslims are against the Independence of Kashmir because if Kashmir stays in India, the Indian Muslims would be more in numbers and would be more influential electorally and otherwise. Also theres the question of whether Kashmiri Muslims consider themselves to be Indian Muslims or not and whether Indian Muslims are providing any material support to the Kashmiris. However I do appreciate the fact that some Hindus would consider Kashmiri Muslims to be a part of the larger Indian Muslim community. So RR’s point here has some merit.
(3) Historical Destruction of the Hindu Temples and some tyrranical Muslim kings like Aurangzeb….
Aurangzeb had his empire in the 1600’s. It seems to me that 400 years is too far back in time to hold grievances. If we start going back 500 years plus, almost every nation/people would have some grievance against someone.
Also before the Indian Hindus can blame the Indian Muslims for the destruction of temples, we also have to consider the fact whether there are any connections between Ghazni and present day Indian Muslims. There was a racial and religious component to these invaders. They invaders considered themselves different due to their monotheism and were also of a different race. Current day Muslims are not the descendents of Ghaznavi or Babar. Over-overwhelming majority of them are converts. I dont see the logic in blaming Muslims living in Delhi in 2004 for the actions of Ghaznavi. Just because their ancestors converted to Islam 150 years back does not mean that they are now responsible for the actions of Ghaznavi. Almost all Muslims in India have the same racial and ethnic make similar to that of Hindus in the states they live in. ( I do understand that some bourgeois Indian Muslims foolishly talk about their Turkish/Mongol/Persian ancestry but that is more a function of Inter Muslim racism and obsession with lighter skin color) If Tamil Muslims or Telegu Muslims are somehow responsible for the sins of Ghazni, then I imagine that Hindus also have some animosity for American Muslim converts or Turks or Chinese Ugur Muslims. That sure is a lot of hate to carry around. A Tamil Muslim has as much in common with Ghanzi as a Malaysian Muslim has in common with Ghazni.

There seems to be a parallel thread running in this discussion that the whole debate is somehow trying to “justify” the Beslan killings. This is totally presumptuous. I won’t speak for others but all I am trying to do is to trace the chronology of this conflict and maybe try to make sense of what drives human beings to commit atrocious acts like this.

Aurangzeb had his empire in the 1600’s. It seems to me that 400 years is too far back in time to hold grievances. If we start going back 500 years plus, almost every nation/people would have some grievance against someone.

I tried to address this part of the argument with my Dark Ages comment. Obviously the people I had hoped would look at it seem to have missed it altogether.

You kill innocents, that’s terrorism to me.

That won’t work. America is replete with figureheads like Jack the Ripper, Ted Bundy et al who went on for years murdering innocent women — yet we don’t call them “terrorists”. We use fancy terms like ‘crazy’, ‘schizophrenic’, ‘emotionally-detached” and all other mumbo-jumbo. There is something about creating a massive scale of destruction in trying to fullfil a half-baked cause that makes people call them terrorists.

Minor point - Jack the Ripper was in London, not US.

Major point, there is a big difference between serial killers and Jehadis and I am not going to spend another three days arguing what it is.

maybe try to make sense of what drives human beings to commit atrocious acts like this

How cool. Distingushed sociologists, are we, by any chance?

RR

There is something about creating a massive scale of destruction in trying to fullfil a half-baked cause that makes people call them terrorists.

Don’t kill me with your reasonableness. Restore “balance” immediately by diving into Gujarat,

Cheers,
RR

Dismissing all people who have legitimate nationalistic aspirations as crazy ‘Jehadis’ is not productive. :evil:

AM, a lot of these movements might have started with legitimate grievances - how many of them still remember what they once stood for? I think 90% of these movements have co-opted by the global jehadi orgs and the founders might not even recognize the acts committed in the name of nationalistic causes anymore.

Shanti:

You mentioned this discussion in our email exchange and I swung by just now to peer over your collective shoulders. I skimmed through most of it — it is long! — till I came to this from you:

> I don’t care if Russia ethnically cleansed all the
> Chechenyans.
> The minute they lifted their guns to shoot a
> starving, naked, scared, fleeing, innocent child in
> the back, they lost any claim to morals or causes.

I can’t argue with that.

I will tell you about travelling through Gujarat in early April 2002, while the violence there was still happening.

Spent a long time one morning trying to talk to a young girl, perhaps 12, who had been raped by a dozen men. She couldn’t speak, the trauma was that great. It was also that evident on her face. I’m not sure I’ll be able to forget those frighteningly empty eyes.

Spent another half-hour with a woman and her 7 year old son. They had watched her sister and her six kids slaughtered as they tried to flee into the fields. This little boy himself had been slashed on his head, flung on a garbage dump and left for dead. (I could still see the long gash on his head). She and the son held my hands, weeping, pleaded with me to “bring back humanity” (as if I had some ability to do so).

A ten-year-old girl, N, told me of how her home was burned, her family assaulted and killed. Said it sort of sotfly and evenly for a while, but then started sobbing for her best friend, another young girl. N remembers her friend standing in the street as the carnage happened around her, shouting over and over again that her father was coming to save her. Only he didn’t, because he was already dead. She carried on shouting until she was herself chopped down. All while N watched.

Enough.

After meeting these kids, I too thought that their attackers had “lost any claim to morals or causes.”
(Like you did after what happened to those Russian kids, like I did after what happened to the Russian kids).

Yet what’s the hard truth I’m faced with? Many many people disagree with me. Some right here on this blog. (Others tell me I’m lying). Many many people even applaud what happened to those kids.

Yes, those kids. Who also once sat on their mothers’ laps.

Yours,
Dilip D’Souza

Minor point - Jack the Ripper was in London, not US.

Sorry. My bad.

Major point, there is a big difference between serial killers and Jehadis and I am not going to spend another three days arguing what it is.

Did I equate serial killers with Jihadis? I just said that lumping everyone who kills innocent human beings under the banner of “terrorists” does not seem correct because even serial killers target innocent people. What is it you are disagreeing here?

how many of them still remember what they once stood for?

Give me an example where you are led to believe nationalists no longer remember what they stood for. And please don’t bring in Beslan once again. According to the so called secessionists it is still their means to an end.

I think 90% of these movements have co-opted by the global jehadi orgs and the founders might not even recognize the acts committed in the name of nationalistic causes anymore

Exactly whose problem is that? That al-Qaeda and other terrorist outfits try to make common cause with nationalist movements that have reached a desperate stage for want of a solution is the fault of the movement themselves? What kind of logic is that?

Dilip, your words sounded like you were wondering why there are different names for killers of innocents - that was why I said there is a difference. If we are not disagreeing, then I am surprised but not unhappy :)

Dilip, not everything is a blame-game or rests in zero-sums. Recognizing something is happening doesn’t mean you have to blame someone or something for it.

As for an example of a nationalistic movement that no longer remembers what it stood for, what about Kashmir? Do the terrorists operating there really care for Kashmiris and their genuine aspirations or do they care more about spreading “Islamiyat” in the region?

If we are not disagreeing, then I am surprised but not unhappy

WOW! Its great to be on your side. Now I can rest assured you won’t assasinate me for disagreeing with you in the past ;-)

Dilip—

That won’t work. {i.e. my mention that if you kill innocents, you’re a terrorist.}

Okay, I’ll accept that. What I was trying to do was use the meaning of the word “terrorism”. Shorter Oxford has: “A system of terror … A policy intended to strike with terror … the fact of terrorizing or condition of being terrorized.” Chambers has “The systematic and organized use of violence and intimidation to force a government or community, etc, to act in a certain way or accept certain demands.”

Yes, Jack The Ripper doesn’t fit those.

But, as I said earlier, Gujarat, Besslan, 9/11, the Bombay blasts, Rwanda, the Bombay riots, Akshardham, the ‘84 Sikh carnage, I think all these do fit. Because in every one of those, innocent human beings were murdered. They also fit what you said:

There is something about creating a massive scale of destruction in trying to fullfil a half-baked cause that makes people call them terrorists.

But for some reason, people refuse to recognize Gujarat, alone, for what it was: an atrocity every bit as horrible as Besslan or others, one more act of terrorism we’ve suffered.

Sudhakar.

Shanti—

what about Kashmir? Do the terrorists operating there really care for Kashmiris and their genuine aspirations or do they care more about spreading “Islamiyat” in the region?

Really, what about Kashmir? How many of us have been there and spoken to the people there — note, not the terrorists, but the ordinary people — about their aspirations, and then drawn conclusions about “nationalistic movements” that have “forgotten” what they stood fo