Sunday, March 17, 2019

"Muslim terrorists" , like "Islamic bomb" is a marketing tool created by Muslim leaders

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Neerja Bhanot killing: FBI releases new images in 1986 hijacking case


















In the early 70s then  Pakistan president Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto told the world but particularly India that he would create the  first "Islamic bomb"; a nuclear device that would rival if not better India's nuclear capabilities. 

He was assisted by Saudi and other Arabs,who have a long history of funding Pakistani nuclear scientists.

In the late 60s and early 70s Libya, working with Malaysia and the Organisation of Islamic Conferences (OIC, now known as thence Organisation of Islamic Cooperation ) provided funding,arms and training to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to assist the MILF conquer Southern Philippines. 


The 1970s also a series of plane hijackings, often perpetrated by men and women who were not afraid to advertise their Islamic faith.  Israel was not the only target; so was India.The case of World Airways  Flight 73 is but one example.

India has of course been the subject of a number of recent jihadi attacks. 
As the former head of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence put it:
"These jihadi groups and Jihad is the guarantor of our peaceful existence. These are the insurance policy of our peaceful existence."
(See reference material below)


"Muslim terrorists" , like he t "Islamic  bomb" are inventions of Muslim leaders who seem to have decided  that they were never going to win a conventional war and would have to rely on physiological warfare, using guerilla units either in or near Western or non-Muslim targets to create fear,and then an environment conducive to negotiations on terms favorable to them.
The examples are many,and the aftermath of 9-11 where Western countries could not spend enough to "fight discrimination"  is a good example.
Insisting that everyone now stop using the phrase "Muslim terrorists
" is a bit too late. That genie can only be recaptured by the very 
Muslims leaders who created it. END



References 

Hameed Gul and Pakistan's jihadi "insurance policy".


As reported in The Deccan Herald,15 September 2011:

.....in a conversation in Islamabad many years ago, former ISI chief Maj. Gen. Hamid Gul boasted to this analyst that the ISI had over 300 “sleeper cells” inside India which, he asserted, could be activated at any time. 
(Full article below)

The above should be read together with the following notes I sent previously:
The following is very short excerpt, translated from Urdu , from the Islamist magazine "Takbeer" of  Pakistan. 
Takbeer, 28 august 2002, on page 17; report by Aslam Awan; an interview with Lt GenHameed Gul, former Director-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI);
"These jihadi groups and Jihad is the guarantor of our peaceful existence. These are the insurance policy of our peaceful existence."
Also see  Gul's delight at the prospect of "jihadis .. (being).. the right arm of the Pakistan army!" -can be viewed at link: 




Deccan Chronicle
Published on Deccan Chronicle (http://www.deccanchronicle.com)


Cut terror’s Saudi pocket money

Another terrorist incident, this time at Delhi high court, and the same old response — a lot of helter-skelter activity amounting to little. A week after the blast, not a substantive clue has been unearthed by the National Intelligence Agency and Delhi Police whose men in khaki more and more resemble a bunch of bumbling buffoons, who seem to do a better job of extorting money from canoodling couples in parks than protecting the city from terrorists, criminals and assorted bad guys. But the Government of India does not seem overly concerned. According to home minister P. Chidambaram, some 51 ISI-supported terrorist cells in India have been “neutralised” in the last few years. That leaves 250-odd Pakistan ISI-founded cells intact. How’s that? Well, in a conversation in Islamabad many years ago, former ISI chief Maj. Gen. Hamid Gul boasted to this analyst that the ISI had over 300 “sleeper cells” inside India which, he asserted, could be activated at any time. The good mason Chidambaram informs us that a strong anti-terror policy and administrative edifice is built “brick by brick”. At his present rate of construction, it is reasonable to assume that it will take a long time to come up. If domestic political factors inhibit hard policing and monitoring as means of deterring terrorism and pre-empting terrorist attacks within India, a similar hesitation on the part of the leading powers squarely prevents its stifling at the source. The global jihad perpetrated by Sunni Muslim terrorist outfits is sustained financially by billions of dollars funnelled by religious charities mainly in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. These monies go into founding thousands of madrasas in the Islamic world and the subcontinent. Wracked by poverty and illiteracy, the Saudi-funded madrasas host teens and young adults who are pickled in the harsh Wahhabi values of desert Islam preached therein. It is the fuel driving Al Qaeda, its Pakistan Punjab-based derivatives — the various Lashkars — and the emerging groups of extremist and, ironically, educated Muslims in India surreptitiously joining banned groups, such as the Students’ Islamic Movement of India and their spin-offs, like Indian Mujahideen. Starve the terrorist groups of monies and extremism will dry up is a simple enough plan for anti-terrorist action that finds no backers. The Saud family has made it clear that while it does not care for the excesses of Wahhabism to destabilise its fief, it will happily countenance the diversion of this fundamentalist ideology away from its own kingdom and towards distant lands by transfer of funds routed through Islamic charities. The US, which trumpets its global war against terrorism, is aware of the Saudi and Gulf funds propelling the spread of intolerant Wahhabi Islam in Pakistan and generally the subcontinent, but has not rid Arabia of its current rulers, an option Washington has exercised against regimes elsewhere in the region for offering far less provocation. The reason, of course, is the pliability of the Sauds. It is better, the US believes, to have these self-proclaimed “guardians of Mecca and Medina” and habitues of Monte Carlo in the saddle whom Washington can play the puppet master to, than replace them with an unknown colonel and end up with a Gaddafi who, eventually, has to be brought down. This has put US in the uncomfortable position of hurrahing along the democratic-minded Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, the Tahrir Square movement in Egypt, the rebellion against the long-ruling Assad family in Syria while doing an about-turn when the Shia majority in Bahrain, demanding freedom, turned on the minority Sunni-ruling clique of King Hamad. The American fear was that encouraging the democratic impulses in Bahrain would incline the Shias inhabiting the rich, oil-bearing portions of that country to throw the Sauds out, thereby creating a swath of Shia states in West Asia controlling the oil and looking to Tehran for religious and political guidance and support. But if Riyadh is unwilling to shut off the Wahhabist funding channel for reasons of survival, and the US government is unable to put the kibosh on the Sauds for reasons of politico-strategic expediency, shouldn’t Delhi, even if belatedly and at a minimum, take some basic preventive measures rather than incessantly plead with US to prevail on Islamabad to cease and desist from exporting and facilitating terrorism in India? After all, it is over two decades now since ISI-prompted terrorism raised its head in the wake of the 1989 elections in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian government should, by now, have emplaced laws, rules and regulations requiring close monitoring of the inward flowing funds from Saudi and Gulf religious charities, audited accounts and explanation of expenditure of these funds from the Indian beneficiary institutions, and carried out official vetting of teachers and syllabi in the madrasas run on these monies. The absence of such a preventive legal-administrative system does not denote a secular state, merely a confused one. As a result a previously communally peaceful Kerala is now a hotbed of Islamic radicalism. Where Kerala is today, India may be tomorrow. Bharat Karnad is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

No comments:

Post a Comment