Posted on 12/15/2008 6:25:41 PM PST by MyTwoCopperCoins
MUMBAI: The Muslims of terror-plagued Mumbai know the drill.
First there is bloodshed. Then come the whispers, the accusing stares, the scarcely veiled hostility.
"They are going to say that all Muslims do this," restaurateur Naved Akhtar Mirza said, after gunmen, apparently Islamic extremists, stormed India's financial capital last month, shooting up a train station and killing hostages at two hotels and a Jewish center.
To their relief, no violence against Muslims has erupted, despite simmering tensions and several previous episodes of sectarian strife. Community leaders hope that a grudging sense of tolerance, if not harmony, will continue to prevail in the aftermath of the 60 hours of mayhem in which more than 170 people died.
But the uneasy peace masks the fact that India's 150 million Muslims -- about as many as live in neighboring Pakistan -- are often branded a fifth column and looked on with distrust and even disgust in this Hindu-majority country. Many live a marginalized existence in poverty-stricken ghettos, uneducated, unable to find work and sometimes abused or unfairly arrested by police, giving rise to resentment that observers warn could be exploited by radical groups.
Last weekend, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh warned bluntly of "an unacceptable rise in intolerance" that he said has made India "more divided, more angry and, tragically, more violent."
Seeking to keep a lid on any backlash, Singh declared that "it is the fundamental right of all to follow their religion, practice their culture and hold to their views. . . . It is nobody's right to deny anyone this right or to dictate faith and opinions to others."
Muslims worship freely in India, where they account for about 14% of the population of 1.1 billion.
...
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Did the muslims in India march in solidarity with the victims of the terror attacks?
A massive outpouring of condemnation of the attacks would have sent a powerful signal.
Hat tip to Mark Steyn....
They do. Some do the shooting, and some stand around silently, cheering on the inside. Then they go home and donate money to Islamic "charities" which fund terrorism.
'Til then ? ..... Walter.
You have to wonder if the LA Times is suggesting that we in the US should behave in this manner when we get ‘hit’. Note I said “When”, since I have no confidence that the incoming Obama administration will take Islamic terrorism seriously.
The local Muslim religious leaders did refuse to accept the terrorists bodies for burial in their Muslim cemeteries. I don’t think the locals are sympathetic to these guys.
On the other hand, as usual, there is a whackjob Muslim student movement.
Maybe my Funk & Wagnall's is out of date, but I wouldn't equate "60 hours of mayhem in which more than 170 people died" with "tolerance, if not harmony."
Note to India: you gave up any hope for harmony when you tolerated muslime in your country.
Many [Indian muslime] live a marginalized existence in poverty-stricken ghettos, uneducated, unable to find work and sometimes abused or unfairly arrested by police, giving rise to resentment that observers warn could be exploited by radical groups.
The same old boo-hoo chorus. The poor suffering slimes. They wouldn't do any of these horrible things if they weren't "marginalized," "poverty-striken," "uneducated," blah blah blah. I think someone has cause and effect mixed up here. Maybe they're marginalized, poor, stupid, and unemployable BECAUSE they're slime. Maybe they'd be better off going to one of their own vastly wealthy countries, like Somalia or Yemen, and basking in the untold riches there.
Last weekend, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh warned bluntly of "an unacceptable rise in intolerance" that he said has made India "more divided, more angry and, tragically, more violent."
Yes, and that intolerance starts and ends with the slimes. Everyone else is supposed to "tolerate" their savagery, their filth, and their hate. But they get to riot and behead people any time a sweet potato is grown that looks like Mohammed.
Seeking to keep a lid on any backlash, Singh declared that "it is the fundamental right of all to follow their religion, practice their culture and hold to their views. . . . It is nobody's right to deny anyone this right or to dictate faith and opinions to others."
Then how is it that the slime seem to think they can murder anyone who practices any religion but theirs? Maybe you ought to be talking to THEM, not the Hindus, the Sikhs, or the Buddhists. I don't see any of them slaughtering innocents.
Muslims worship freely in India, where they account for about 14% of the population
And about 100% of the mayhem.
They do whatever they have to do to survive. Until they gain power. Then it’s convert, or die.
But of course, the real victims are the Muslims. The LA Times is very helpful in reminding us of this. After reading earlier today that "millions of Americans believe Bush orchestrated the WTC attack," I have about had it. I am disgusted with what is likely a majority of my fellow Americans in a way I have never been before.
I have no problem with having an argument about policy on a given set of facts and circumstances but when the facts are manipulated, distorted and outright ignored for idealogical reason, I can see no hope.
What will Obama do when one of the Islamic countries tell him the price for normalization of relations is the prosecution of American war criminals? I see this coming.
My wife is Indian and grew up in Hyderabad, which has a large Muslim population. She told me that when India and Pakistan play a cricket match, Indian Muslims root for Pakistan. That shows where their loyalties are.
I know they are pretty serious about their Cricket over there, so that is not inconsequential.
They fail to remember or report that most of the terrorist attacks are carried out, or are at least led by, well educated Muslims. The uneducated, and ignorant are to stupid and undisciplined to be much more than cannon fodder.
Engineers, doctors, chemists, and students of same have been killed or captured in attacks on the West, way out of proportion to their numbers.
So what's the lesson the oh-so-sophisticated LAT reporter wants us to take out of this? That the REAL issue is how oppressed Muslims are. But why in this instance? Indians aren't rich, white Westerners. They are the "Third World" too. Its a pathalogical identification with oppressors. Makes me sick.
Yeah, but I'll bet the same isn't true in Pakistan.
At least there is somewhere in the world that Moslems are in the fishbowl, so to speak.
Until they find out how much "inside help" the terrorists had from local Muslims. Mumbai has lots of Muslims from what I understand, (A guy at work is from there, many many moons ago, but he calls it Bombay)
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.