Posted on 07/03/2007 6:04:50 PM PDT by nuconvert
In this undated photo released on Tuesday, July 3, 2007, by Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences in Bangalore, India, shown is Indian doctor Muhammad Haneef. Police in Australia arrested Haneef, an Indian doctor late Monday, July 2, in connection with the foiled terror attacks in London and Glasgow as he tried to leave the country and were interviewing a second doctor in the case, officials said Tuesday, July 3. The records showed Haneef graduated from the university in 2002. (Rajiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, HO/AP Photo)
Anyone know if any of these so called healers were involved in nuclear medicine?
Yes, but the one thing that is stepped carefully around is that he is of the Muslim persuasion, so to speak. The key factor in all of this is that the perps are muzzies, and the media looses even more credibility by not just stating that plain fact.
They mention his name, his profession and that he is of Indian descent. Yet, nothing is mentioned about his religion.
The war between us and Muslims is all about the rich vs. the poor.
/sarc
I hope they are not using John Cleese's Comfy Chair!
He may be from India, but I bet he is from the far western reaches of the country bordering on Pakistan, with a name like that. And I see that the article goes to great lengths in avoiding the good doctor's religious persuasion. Hindu he ain't!
He’s not an Indian doctor, but an ISLAMIC doctor. Let’s get this profiling correct.
It’s the names ~ Moslems all have Islamic names. You’d better believe people in India know what they are ~
/sarcasm.
L
Haneef, by itself, is enough to identify him as Moslem.
I have yet to meet any Indian who is a Hindu, Christian, Sikh or Zorastian with the name Muhammad. This Indian is a muslim, period. Gee, with a name like Muhammad, who would of thought?
His name betrays him.
As someone of Indian descent I am disturbed by this. Not surprised considering that he is Muslim (Muslims comprise maybe 12-15% of India’s population).
sad because he is an Indian terrorist, and the overwhelming majority of Indians are very pro US, and this is the first time I’ve heard of an Indian being involved in an Al-Qaida linked attack.
hell, the first doctor to ground zero was an Indian Sikh.
What really pisses me off about the article is that it gives fodder to people to profile Indians as if they are possibly terrorists... which will affect me tomorrow at the Airport, despite my deep love for my country, the US.
and I’ll never understand why these articles don’t mention the fact that he is MUSLIM. Just like last month or the month before when a group of Muslims terrorized a Sikh schoolboy in Queens, the article mentioned that the victim was a Sikh, but NEVER mentioned the attackers’ religion. ridiculous.
You know that for centuries the British and later now the US have always soft-pedaled the valid criticisms of Islam but have supported them against Hindus and Christians. It is a very blatant conspiracy, and makes one wonder what it is about this demonic religion that so attracts the elite of prosperous societies. Is it because our elite are jealous of the control the Muslims wield over their entire societies?
Belated welcome aboard ArjMoney. Thanks for posting.
I'd send that one up the chain of command, and QUICKLY.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
Can we link Britain’s NHS, replete with foreign terrorists, and Michael Moore’s “Sicko”?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.