Pleas For Sanity as Sabres Rattle Over Mumbai Mayhem

Re: # 1212 harish_hyd

The Paki state thus sees them as allies, not enemies

You've put your finger on it, sir.

Yes, this is an area that I find myself returning to again and again. The crux of the matter really pivots on a) whether or not Zardari & Co are serious when they say theyre against LeT and it's deployment against India and b) If they are serious, what is their capacity to act against these interests

'.i have always felt that indian muslims are india's biggerst asset and its biggest liability......if india can get their living standards to a very high level, than the idea of pakistan fails.....however, if india cannot do that, then the idea of pakistan, gains weight.......'

Now, the question is, ' Is raising their standard responsibility of Indian Government and non-muslim Indians only or community itself and its leaders also have some responsibility towards it?
Only if M Shahabudin ex MP and others of his kind start concentrating more on condition of the community then whether one is a 'Muslim Indian' or 'Indian Muslim', whether Taslima should get visa or not, whether to send kids to school to study in Indian languages in addition to Urdu as a language or not (Haryana meo case) etc etc?

Regards

tahmed ji
'and you were there with your adding machine keeping count'

No, Sir, I was not but so was the case with those from other side who keep on updating data on a regular basis according to a pre-decided percentage increase.
Regards

h-h ji
Thanks for your concern. But when one is in cyberspace one has to receive and accept all kind of material coming ones way. And by the way, hamidm ji is Chowk Icon- Chowk Idol and a much admired/respected man. Of course, he has a way with the language that everyone loves to read what he writes.
Regards

#1223 "these guys have killed more people"

...and you were there with your adding machine keeping count.

romair #1225 again this half-baked comparisons in your attempts at tarring a democratic nation with the same brush as is applied to terrorists and rogue regimes:

1. Bush is leaving power when his term is up. Hitler did not.

2. on your changing the meaning of the word "terrorism" in our capacity of defense lawyer to obl and the 10 miserable men - seE #1226.

also on #1220: you are merely playing with words in your attempts to compare apples and oranges. lets get the terminology straight:

"terrorism" has a specific meaning - individual groups that target civilians.

when nations target civilians - the term used is "war crimes", "genocide", or "crimes against humanity", depending on the context.

if you wish to be obl's lawyer, or the lawyer for these ten miserable men who attacked mumbai - that is your choice. but dont change the meaning of words to support what you are trying to prove.

tahmad #: "bush is an elected president (granted the first time around the process was not quite kosher) of a country. when did al qaeda hold its last elections?"

....hitler was an elected chancellor of germany also.....all the indian prime ministers, who have pushed kashmir policies, are elected.......russia's actions in chechnya are carried out by an elected putin.....

......state terrorism is, generally, carried out by elected leaders, using state machinery to carry out terroristic activities in other countries......i.e. killing innocent civilians in other countries, to achieve their political aims......

that is why it is called state terrorism.....it is not carried out by a non-state actor, but has the complete power of a state govt. (with an elected state head) behind it.......

.......unless, of course, one believes that being an elected state head, absolves one of all acts of terrorism.....

......in which case, you would agree than modi has never committed any terrorism......he gets elected, again and again, as the chief minister of a state....and has even been absolved of all crimes by the national courts (unlike bush who refuses to recognized the int'l criminal court).......

#1223 by Humsab

Humsab ji, please do not lower your dignity by responding to a chut!ya like Romair. Leave that to lesser mortals like me or aces like hamidm2 and tahmed32 sahibs, who seem to be doing a fine job of it.

'what needs to be studied is who comes first......the state terrorist or the individual terrorist......and who kills more people.......'

In the case of Kashmir, it is well documented that individual terrorists came first in late 80s as far as present cycle is concerned and these guys have killed more people.

Judgement-----?????
Regards

borivilli_express #: you are carrying out a valiant (and articulate) fight.....as hamidm mian has highlighted many of us from the wrong side of the border would come to your assistance, however, we could be accussed of interfering in india's internal affairs.....which we would be doing.......(now if you were a kashmiri from across the LoC and not the border, it would be a different story)......

not to say that you require any assistance, or have asked for any....

.....in any case, the analyses you are presenting, are interesting, and provide an otherwise disappearing view on this site (that of an indian muslim)......

.....i have always felt that indian muslims are india's biggerst asset and its biggest liability......if india can get their living standards to a very high level, than the idea of pakistan fails.....however, if india cannot do that, then the idea of pakistan, gains weight.......

#1220 romair: bush is an elected president (granted the first time around the process was not quite kosher) of a country. when did al qaeda hold its last elections?

bush is bound by a constitution (even if he stupidly tried to overstep it at times, he ultimately failed). what constitution is obl bound by?

you are equating cops and robbers when you equate the US and terrorists.

tahmad #: "i get it. cops are state terrorists. robbers are individual terrorists. wow!!"

....i am afraid you get very little....you need to try to get some more....cops and robbers have nothing to do with terrorism....that is related to criminal activities (or childhood games).....

......bush is a state terrorist (leads a state machinery in committing acts of terrorism)......obl is an individual terrorist (leads a non-state organization in committing acts of terrorism)......pakistan govt. in 71 was a state terorist.....mukti bahani was an individual terrorist.....indian govt in kashmir is a state terrorist....various factions of LeT are individual terrorists......turkish govt. in kurd lands are state terrorists......various factions of kurd movements are individual terroists.......russian govt. in chechnya are state terrorists......various factions of the chechnyan resistance have committed individual terrorism.....ussr in afghanistan was state terrorist......some factions of mujahideen resistance were individual terrorists.....usa in iraq is a state terrorist.....al-qaeda in iraq is an individual terrorist....french in algeria were state terrorist.....various acts of algerian resistance were invidiaul terrorism......

what needs to be studied is who comes first......the state terrorist or the individual terrorist......and who kills more people.......

hamidm: i see you have struggled mightily with the indian hordes on chowk for the rights of the kashmiris. i am touched by this sudden concern that you develop for the "unwashed masses" when it comes to kashmir.

Eklayva # :"If Mukti bahini did what LeT does, then it was a terrorist organization........If Advanis does what Hafiz Saeed does then Advani is an outright terrorist."

.....thanks for the straightforward answers......

...i am bit surprised you are unaware of what mukti bahani did......it was one of the most successful chapters in indian history, and turned indra gandhi into a superstar....

.....i am also surprised you are unaware of what advani has done......if my info is correct, he was the mastermind behind ayodhya.......

.......just out of curiousity, do you believe in anil's very pragmatic theory, also, "if a person achieves his aims through terrorist, then he seizes to be a terrorism......however, if he doesn't, then he is a terrorist?"........

when i think about it, practically speaking, it is accurate.....however, i think it simply raises the ante for more terrorism, and doesn't reduce it........

#1216 i get it. cops are state terrorists. robbers are individual terrorists. wow!!