Mumbai rocked by attacks!

[mac]

Originally Posted by herewego
now abt the mumbai bombing...yes pakistan is suffering from terrorism but these terrorist were bred by pakistan only. Pakistan let dawood ibrahim, the greatest terrorist of india to seek refuge in pakistan. Isi is blamed to be primarily responsible for the blast at the indian embassy in kabul (according to cia). And guess wat..these men caught in mumbai attack are pakistanis too.

আটক জংগি নাকি বলেছে ৪০ এর উপর জংগি করাচি থেকে মুম্বাই এশেছে যার মাঝে ২৯ জন পাকিস্তানি আর বাকিরা বাংলাদেশি নাগরিক!!!

[bharat]

I cannot but blame the concept of the Muslim Ummah rather than the average Muslim in India.

What has an Indian Muslim got to do with an Isrealis or Jews in India.What has an average Indian Muslim anything to do with the US or British invasion in Iraq.What have the 'upholders of Islam Ummah " the Rich Saudis done to stop these invasions and to stop Isreal.Nothing ...what they have done is 'outsource' their philosphy to countries like India while they share the bed with enemy (the US)

I fail to understand what has the World Muslim Ummah done to an average Muslim in India except to fill their brains with Terrorism.They have not helped them out in terms of education or lifting them out of poverty.The average Indian Muslim is treated like a slave when he goes to work in the middle east , where has Universal brothership vanished ?

The Indian Muslim faces the same problems as that of the average Hindu .India does have problems like any other place in the world.But they are OUR problems and we are doing out best to solve them..we have a great constitution and ultimately we will be able to resolve our problems..

I sincierly hope that my Indian Muslim brother in India is kep away from the 'utopian' concept of Universal Muslim Brotherhood'.

[bharat]

Originally Posted by Alien
Pakistan itself is plagued by Al Qaeda attacks. There is an average of 2 suicide bombing a week probably the third highest after Iraq and Afghanistan. Blaming Pakistani goverment for this is anything short of madness just like blaming Bangladesh. No goverment would do something stupid and not expect strong repurcussion.

I hope US does something because India will start flexing its military muscle after this for sure.

Alien I agree that Pak is faced with Terrorism too.But the problem with Pak is that they are very selective in their fight against their Terror.

They fight terror on the NWFP but at the same time shelter Terrorists like Maulana Masood, Dawood and organizations like Lashkar-e Taibah.

What justification does Pak have in harbouring Dawood or Maulana Masood Azar ( the relased terrorist after the 99 plane hijacking).

[bdchamp20]

You raise some valid points Bharat.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by bharat
I cannot but blame the concept of the Muslim Ummah rather than the average Muslim in India.

as you've stated the concept itself has been flawed. it has basically become the same thing as white supremacism, black power, hindutva, or zionism.

i hope you read my previous post, where i basically argue that there is a two-pronged reason for all this bloodshed. the misinterpretation of scripture - which i will agree is very easy to misinterpret - and the foreign policies of the powers that be. and that of course fosters a cycle as human beings are prone to seek revenge monday through sunday.

but in actuality the true concept of the ummah is vastly different. using the seerah and quran as its template, we see that the ummah actually encompasses the entire world after the advent of Muhammad (saw). each prophet had his own ummah, which is not just made up of the muslims of that time, but of the non-muslims of that time as well. each ummah will be judged according to their beliefs and the Divine code of that time. the last ummah is the ummah of Muhammad (saw) and includes muslims and everyone else.

ummah is usually taken to mean just the muslim world. and we can see from the quran that justice trumps religious identity.

Verily, Allah commands that you should render back the trusts to those, to whom they are due, and that when you judge between men, you judge with justice. Verily, how excellent is the teaching which He gives to you!

Quran 4:58

and my personal favorite:

Oh you who believe, stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even though it be against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor. Allah is a better Protector to both...

Quran 4:135

not one of the terrorist organizations follows these edicts - they're too busy misinterpreting 9:29 - and they don't much regard "muslim brotherhood" either judging from the religious background of the vast majority of their victims.

for every NYC, mumbai, beslan, or haifa, there are 50 najafs, 20 karachis, a dhaka or two, an istanbul, a casablanca, 43 sanas, and nearly 230 thousand kabuls.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84

So there are extremists on both sides.

What matters if such people have the determintation and resources to attack people on the basis of their extreme views

so i have a rhetorical question. i know the correct answer, but i'm interested to see what others think or if they know.


if extremists truly exist on all sides, why is it only that muslims are doing these things?

[HereWeGo]

Originally Posted by mac
আটক জংগি নাকি বলেছে ৪০ এর উপর জংগি করাচি থেকে মুম্বাই এশেছে যার মাঝে ২৯ জন পাকিস্তানি আর বাকিরা বাংলাদেশি নাগরিক!!!

source??????

neways not true...

[Banglatiger84]

Originally Posted by bharat
Alien I agree that Pak is faced with Terrorism too.But the problem with Pak is that they are very selective in their fight against their Terror.

They fight terror on the NWFP but at the same time shelter Terrorists like Maulana Masood, Dawood and organizations like Lashkar-e Taibah.

What justification does Pak have in harbouring Dawood or Maulana Masood Azar ( the relased terrorist after the 99 plane hijacking).

the answer is that some Pakistani ISI agents and their sympathizers believe they have the right to destabilize India, or Afghanistan or any other country.

You hear things like "We should incite Indian Muslims to attack Hindus, so there is a civil war". Thats not the official Pakistani govt policy, but there are elements who feel that way.

Zia ul Haq was prime example of that mentality, he played ethnicities and sects against each other resulting in bloodshed, Russians were ultimate evil and Drug money and Kalashnikov were great to him. He died a violent death as well.

There are Pakistanis who want to kill all non Pakhtuns in Afghanistan, so that they have "strategic depth".

[Banglatiger84]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
so i have a rhetorical question. i know the correct answer, but i'm interested to see what others think or if they know.


if extremists truly exist on all sides, why is it only that muslims are doing these things?

i actually answered the question

What matters is if such people have the determintation and resources to attack people on the basis of their extreme views .

Muslim extremists seem to have more determination to kill, pity they dont have the determination to do constuctive things for Muslims

[bharat]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
as you've stated the concept itself has been flawed. it has basically become the same thing as white supremacism, black power, hindutva, or zionism.

i hope you read my previous post, where i basically argue that there is a two-pronged reason for all this bloodshed. the misinterpretation of scripture - which i will agree is very easy to misinterpret - and the foreign policies of the powers that be. and that of course fosters a cycle as human beings are prone to seek revenge monday through sunday.

but in actuality the true concept of the ummah is vastly different. using the seerah and quran as its template, we see that the ummah actually encompasses the entire world after the advent of Muhammad (saw). each prophet had his own ummah, which is not just made up of the muslims of that time, but of the non-muslims of that time as well. each ummah will be judged according to their beliefs and the Divine code of that time. the last ummah is the ummah of Muhammad (saw) and includes muslims and everyone else.

ummah is usually taken to mean just the muslim world. and we can see from the quran that justice trumps religious identity.

and my personal favorite:

not one of the terrorist organizations follows these edicts - they're too busy misinterpreting 9:29 - and they don't much regard "muslim brotherhood" either judging from the religious background of the vast majority of their victims.

for every NYC, mumbai, beslan, or haifa, there are 50 najafs, 20 karachis, a dhaka or two, an istanbul, a casablanca, 43 sanas, and nearly 230 thousand kabuls.

################################################## ######################################
I agree to everything you said but the last comparison.Yes there are atrocities being carried out evreywhere in the world (an in India too) but why should an Indian Muslim be instigated for every act that happens in the world .What has the Indian Muslim go to do with the Neo Con view of the world ? or the new Crusade ? or Zeonism?

Does the Muslim World ideology come to being only at the time of distress to a fellow Muslim across the world ? A muslim he has never seen ...at the cost of fellow human beings who he is closer to by culture and if not any thing else by pure economics (read survival)

This Global 'flat' view of the world is fantastic but is not doing any good


P.S Sorry if I am repeating what I wrote in my previous post

[Rifat]

Originally Posted by bharat
I cannot but blame the concept of the Muslim Ummah rather than the average Muslim in India.

What has an Indian Muslim got to do with an Isrealis or Jews in India.What has an average Indian Muslim anything to do with the US or British invasion in Iraq.What have the 'upholders of Islam Ummah " the Rich Saudis done to stop these invasions and to stop Isreal.Nothing ...what they have done is 'outsource' their philosphy to countries like India while they share the bed with enemy (the US)

I fail to understand what has the World Muslim Ummah done to an average Muslim in India except to fill their brains with Terrorism.They have not helped them out in terms of education or lifting them out of poverty.The average Indian Muslim is treated like a slave when he goes to work in the middle east , where has Universal brothership vanished ?

The Indian Muslim faces the same problems as that of the average Hindu .India does have problems like any other place in the world.But they are OUR problems and we are doing out best to solve them..we have a great constitution and ultimately we will be able to resolve our problems..

I sincierly hope that my Indian Muslim brother in India is kep away from the 'utopian' concept of Universal Muslim Brotherhood'.

hello, Bharat. i want to share some interesting thoughts with you regarding what you said:

you said:

What have the 'upholders of Islam Ummah " the Rich Saudis done to stop these invasions and to stop Isreal.Nothing ...what they have done is 'outsource' their philosphy to countries like India while they share the bed with enemy (the US)

the "upholders of islam ummah" is not the rich saudis alone but rahter all of human beings on earth who chose to submit to Allah and his messenger, so yes, all the muslims on this forum are upholders of islam and all the poor, rich, educated, uneducated as well. the very danger associated with that is that a human being sometimes can be a representative of islam(or showing others that he represents the religion of ALLAH, the only religion accepted by almighty GOD, since it is not a manmade religion, the only one) while that human beings actions speak otherwise.

the other problem is the lack of understanding of Islam, lack of understanding of HOW Prophet Mohammad(may Allah's peace and blessings be upon him) dealt with situations and his everyday life problems. during his lifetimes he and his companions were threatened to death by the rejectors of islam, while today, i don't think muslims in India or elsewhere is faced with this threat...

and yet... they feel insecured! while the prophet(PBUH) and his companions stayed calm and cool until Allah's command came to them to take the sword to the disbelievers even if they be outnumbered. i think Islam today is firmly recognized worldwide, where people are free to live their lifestyle, free to worship GOD, where is the insecurity coming from? these "muslims" in india, do they feel their right to practice Islam is marginalized? are they being oppressed by nonmuslims that they will face death if they continue to practice islam? if that be the case, their actions is "somewhat" justified, but not totally, because then you are killing civillians who has nothing to do with your conflict, not the people who opposed you. so either way, i do not see how in any degree, you can justify such act and say, it is authorized by GOD almighty...

and if you are that type of a muslim where you feel that the "outside world" movies and things against islam that are blatantly displayed in public, which has potential to destroy your faith,or you are overwhelmed by the nonmuslim actions which are indirectly against you, why don't you create a city or a state where these non-islamic influences will not reach because the majority is muslim and just living together, for eachother's support. bombing citie? in my wildest stretch of minds, i can not see how does that elevate the cause of islam? can you?

either way, i can't see how these bombings have anything to do with islam, sadly carried by people who only claim to follow this honourable religion.

you also said:

I cannot but blame the concept of the Muslim Ummah rather than the average Muslim in India.

every muslim, sadly, worldwide has a different idea of brotherhood, although the path of prophet Mohammad(may Allah's PEace be upon him) 's simple way of life is the only path muslims should look up to. they say there are 1.2 or something billion muslims worldwide while i think that number is a huge overestimate, because many of these muslims are just by name only, they have absolutely no idea of what islam is really about. many of these same "name muslims" commit things which are amazingly low and despicable which has nothing to do with what Allah an his Messenger taught. so overall, nonmuslims have a different impression of islam today, depending on whether that nonmuslim has met a person truly practicing islam or just by name, and if you just take the average of all the perceptions, you really lose sight of what islam really is because it's own people are misusing it and taking it as a child's play!

on topic, the concept of "muslim ummah" is an amazing thing, it unites people barring social biases, because they are united by heart and they have a relationship which carries beyond this life, and it is evident in hajj and by the islamic greeting. but does that mean you neglect nonmuslims, off course people who deny the truth of islam will obviously be never trated the same way as another muslim is treated, but that doesn't mean that nonmuslim loses his/her right to practice what he/she thinks is truth!

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by bharat
################################################## ######################################
I agree to everything you said but the last comparison.Yes there are atrocities being carried out evreywhere in the world (an in India too) but why should an Indian Muslim be instigated for every act that happens in the world .What has the Indian Muslim go to do with the Neo Con view of the world ? or the new Crusade ? or Zeonism?

Does the Muslim World ideology come to being only at the time of distress to a fellow Muslim across the world ? A muslim he has never seen ...at the cost of fellow human beings who he is closer to by culture and if not any thing else by pure economics (read survival)

This Global 'flat' view of the world is fantastic but is not doing any good


P.S Sorry if I am repeating what I wrote in my previous post

the question is is religion most important to a muslim over allegiance to his or her state? in other words does an yoruba muslim feel stronger ties to a kuwaiti than he does to a ebo christian even though the two africans are far more similar, simply because of religion?

as with anything else, you will get different answers. most bangladeshi muslims consider themsevles bangladeshi first, muslim second. hence most bangladeshi muslims would place their allegiance to their state. of course there are exceptions.

islamic injunctions are actually to follow the law of whatever land you live in, except if they contradict commandments of islam. so if the law of the land is that i must eat pork or commit adultery, i am obligated to be a criminal. many if not most muslims the world over would feel this way, maybe not in BD, perhaps not in India, etc.

personally, i am a muslim who believes that islam embodies all the good aspects of "western liberlism". i.e the concept of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, the idea of equality of all men and women, the right to believe whatever one wants to believe, the right to criticize other people's beliefs - even to attack those beliefs, the right to live under whatever rules one chooses (the "state within a state" - in this sense i depart from western liberalism), and the idea that individuals should only be responsible for what their personal actions/beliefs.

my allegiance is to justice, which naturally as a muslim i correlate absolutely and unequivocally with the quran.

*****************

so to answer your question. my opinion is that the radical muslim terrorist only sees the world as "us vs them" just like any other radical. radicals cannot survive without the "us vs them". it is their lifeblood. in a sense they are defined by the very people they hate.

as the Joker said to Batman, "You complete me"

so these radicals do associate with the palestinian, the iraqi, or even the jewish convert to islam, more than they do with their fellow citizens. should their own mothers convert to a different faith, they would regard her as more distant than their brothers in faith.

there are other socio-political reasons behind it, but this is a complete picture of the scenario nonetheless.

but is this an accurate depiction of islamic teaching? again every muslim will give you their interpreation of islam.

my feeling is, yes and no.

yes, a muslims bond to other muslims is based on religion and religion alone. this is not what is the case, but what is supposed to be the case. but all of theology is about a theoretical utopia, so its a moot point.

if i say that my bond is first and foremost to bengalis because i am a bengali, this is really a form of ethnocentrism. if i say it is to bangladeshis because i am a bangladeshi this is nationalism or patriotism. these "my country, right or wrong" ideologies, IMO, suck.

however, as a muslim, obviously i believe in islam. this is what the definition of muslim is. i want to make this abundently clear, becaue i had a discussion here about it with some other people who got confused or tried to say something nonsensical. anyways, a muslim is a person who believes in islam. just like a buddhist believes in buddhism. because a muslim beleives in islam over other faiths, he must necessarily believe it to be "superior" to other faiths. again same with a buddhist and his faith. if one does not believe in the superiority of his/her religion, believing in that religion becomes illogical...i.e it is done out of habit alone. no one says or should say, "i believe in such and such, and believe other faiths are superior to it". no, a true believer believes one thing over another, because he sees some relative merit in it. simple concept.

so personally, yes, i do believe in the superiority of islam over other religions, but that also other belief systems are allowed to be practiced on this earth or any other worldly planet. as the quran says in the surah "kafirun" (the Disbelievers),

Say, Oh you who disbelieve, I worship not what you worship, nor do you worship what I worship, nor will I worship that which you worship, nor will you worship that which I worship, to you, your religion, and to me, my religion.

Quran 111:1-6

hope if helps to sort thru the emotions. and God Bless.

[Bancan]

For the last hour and a half, i just saw some of the most dramatic footages ever. Heavy gun firing, grenades exploding, a fire breaking out and then finally the assault ending when a dead body is dragged out. All this live. I watched it on a indian channel. The Indian media is saying the 50+ hr siege is finally over.

[ialbd]

deepest condolence for the bereaved families......

I hope all our non-Bangladeshi friends know that this is not Islam and we absolutely stand against this kind of cowardly act......

[Banglatiger84]

Al Furqaan, many Muslims practise a perverted form of "Brotherhood" which goes as follows:

1) If a Muslim oppresses a non-Muslim or a "lesser" Muslim, support the Muslim (1971, Darfur, Saddam against Kurds,Shias)

2) If a non-Muslim oppresses a Muslim , get confused and react stupidly and ineffectively
e.g. because of Kashmir problem, believe its ok to kill Indian civilians in 2008.
Because of Danish cartoons, its ok to burn shops and cars in a Muslim country.
Because of

[Banglatiger84]

Another form of perverted brotherhood'; some Muslims (no prizes for guessing who) are accusing Indian Muslims who condemned the Mumbai attacks as being "apologists, and agents of Hindus".

Apparently to such people, proving loyalty to Islam is same proving loyalty to Pakistan, and Indian Muslims should have cheered the Mumbai attack.

[imtiaz82]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
the answer is that some Pakistani ISI agents and their sympathizers believe they have the right to destabilize India, or Afghanistan or any other country.

You hear things like "We should incite Indian Muslims to attack Hindus, so there is a civil war". Thats not the official Pakistani govt policy, but there are elements who feel that way.

Zia ul Haq was prime example of that mentality, he played ethnicities and sects against each other resulting in bloodshed, Russians were ultimate evil and Drug money and Kalashnikov were great to him. He died a violent death as well.

There are Pakistanis who want to kill all non Pakhtuns in Afghanistan, so that they have "strategic depth".

While not agreeing to what Pakistani government is involved in, I would like to point out that this is just the ugly side of international politics. Indian government aided the shanti bahini movement in Chittagong Hill tract in Bangladesh aswell as the Tamil tiger movement in late 80s and early 90s. Infact even in 71, the freedom fighters of our side were armed mostly by Indian military and RAW. The same way Pakistani government is providing weapons to kashmiri freedom fighters.

There are countless incidents of other western countries like US and UK doing the same in other nations. Infact US was directly arming the Afghan mujaheeden against the Russians..So it's not that there is something inherently evil to only ISI. This kind of actions are prevalent all over the world. There is no one solution to stopping this. Maybe if an issue that threatens the entire human race or a common goal for every nation to achieve something emerges, we will finally see a change in this nationalistic behavior across the globe..

[Banglatiger84]

Originally Posted by imtiaz82
While not agreeing to what Pakistani government is involved in, I would like to point out that this is just the ugly side of international politics. Indian government aided the shanti bahini movement in Chittagong Hill tract in Bangladesh aswell as the Tamil tiger movement in late 80s and early 90s. Infact even in 71, the freedom fighters of our side were armed mostly by Indian military and RAW. The same way Pakistani government is providing weapons to kashmiri freedom fighters.

There are countless incidents of other western countries like US and UK doing the same in other nations. Infact US was directly arming the Afghan mujaheeden against the Russians..So it's not that there is something inherently evil to only ISI. This kind of actions are prevalent all over the world. There is no one solution to stopping this. Maybe if an issue that threatens the entire human race or a common goal for every nation to achieve something emerges, we will finally see a change in this nationalistic behavior across the globe..

Of course ISI isnt the only one. However, we expect more of them being Muslims. And we also dont expect them to speak of Islamic unity on one hand, and forment strife among Muslims on the other hand.

Then again its just a fringe element of ISI. Maybe 20% ?

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by imtiaz82
While not agreeing to what Pakistani government is involved in, I would like to point out that this is just the ugly side of international politics. Indian government aided the shanti bahini movement in Chittagong Hill tract in Bangladesh aswell as the Tamil tiger movement in late 80s and early 90s. Infact even in 71, the freedom fighters of our side were armed mostly by Indian military and RAW. The same way Pakistani government is providing weapons to kashmiri freedom fighters.

There are countless incidents of other western countries like US and UK doing the same in other nations. Infact US was directly arming the Afghan mujaheeden against the Russians..So it's not that there is something inherently evil to only ISI. This kind of actions are prevalent all over the world. There is no one solution to stopping this. Maybe if an issue that threatens the entire human race or a common goal for every nation to achieve something emerges, we will finally see a change in this nationalistic behavior across the globe..

top post. this is the truth absolutely. every country is a state sponsor of terrorism, which is why every other country just laughs when any one country accuses the other(s) in the media or at the UN.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Banglatiger84
i actually answered the question

What matters is if such people have the determintation and resources to attack people on the basis of their extreme views .

Muslim extremists seem to have more determination to kill, pity they dont have the determination to do constuctive things for Muslims

but why do they have an increased determination to kill?

in my understanding, it is apparent that more hopeless an individual feels, the more prone he or she is to reckless behavior. hopelessness and care for others/himself is a directly inverse relationship.

the point is that given current global scenarios, it is true that the majority of "terrorists" are muslims. but, if the right buttons are pushed anyone can become a "terrorist", even a teddy bear.

last night (or early this morning), i had a conversation with a hindu friend of mine. he went to high school in gujarat, and witnessed the 2002 riots. he is a perfectly good individual, i must stress.

however, this terrorist attack, pushed his buttons and changed his whole demenour. he told me, straight up and point blank, that if it was him, he would torture the terrorists by "pulling their balls off".

i said nothing. what could i say? could i blame him? not at all. i've felt that way many a time before. 90% of the terrorists victims are us. we should be 9 times angrier.

but you see how even one external stimili can turn a perfectly normal human into a beast.

the reason you see so many beasts of muslim faith are numerous:

1) because most terrorists really are muslim, as per the standard defintion of the word
2) because the media will report that which is sensational
3) because muslims are the angriest and most unfortunate people on earth (and much of it they bring on themselves, but much of it comes from external sources as well, obviously)

the bottom line is, any human being can be transformed into a killing machine. if rape, stealing, adultery, cheating, lying, and murder do not have a color or race or ethnicity or religion, than terrorism (at least on potential) doesn't either. anyone could do it, they just need to be pissed off the point where they aren't *human* anymore.

[mac]

Originally Posted by HereWeGo
source??????

neways not true...

NDTV India showed this news yesterday night. But have seen nothing about this today, so it was nothing but rumour.

[ammark]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
in my understanding, it is apparent that more hopeless an individual feels, the more prone he or she is to reckless behavior. hopelessness and care for others/himself is a directly inverse relationship.

and

3) because muslims are the angriest and most unfortunate people on earth (and much of it they bring on themselves, but much of it comes from external sources as well, obviously)

Disregarding the use of the word "prone", what you've illustrated is essentially quite flawed logic that goes round in circles. Just because you're in a self-induced state of hopelessness shouldnt give you the moral authority to engage in reckless behaviour victimising other people. This is blatanly irrational, and a brilliant example of the self-perpetuating intellectually impoverished cycle of the stereotypical reactionary islamic/subcontinental/emotional mindset. Violence is a sad excuse for pity you wish to receive.

[Banglatiger84]

AlFurqaan, if most Muslim bombers were relatives of victims of Israeli or Indian state terrorism, I would understand their hopelessness.

But in many cases, they are just kids trying to have fun, or misguided idiots, or emotional wrecks.

Modi was responsible for death of 2000 Muslims, why wasnt a single attempt made on his life by these gunmen?

Notice how they dont attack the real culprit and always kill innocent civilians which just backfires ....

[cricket_pagol]

Check this link

While terror in Mumbai was underway 'The Economist' commented: Its assailants, still holed up in the city, would like nothing better than to provoke a backlash against Muslim inhabitants-which in turn would help to radicalise India's vast Muslim minority. Long after India's commandos have killed or captured the last of the terrorists that is how they would still hope to win.

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by ammark
and
Disregarding the use of the word "prone", what you've illustrated is essentially quite flawed logic that goes round in circles. Just because you're in a self-induced state of hopelessness shouldnt give you the moral authority to engage in reckless behaviour victimising other people. This is blatanly irrational, and a brilliant example of the self-perpetuating intellectually impoverished cycle of the stereotypical reactionary islamic/subcontinental/emotional mindset. Violence is a sad excuse for pity you wish to receive.

i didn't say it does give them the moral authority, all i said was that that is reason for their actions.

how else can you explain the fact that my perfectly good hindu friend, told me he would torture the terrorists for punishment? was he born with hate for other humans? does he believe in torturing people? no. it was because he was pissed off. we may want to believe that people are in total control of their emotions, but clearly that is not the case. a bad person can turn me into an equally bad person.

why did hindu mobs kill 2000 in gujurat back in 02? because they had nothing to lose (i.e no hope). you didn't see hindu lawyers or doctors or women with children out there did you? no, it was all people with no hope, either worldy or otherwise.

these terrorists may come from wealthy backgrounds, but they don't care about money. to them hope is not about how much money he earn if he works for 50 years rather than killing himself.

for example, you're a muslim. would you do what the terrorists have done? of course not. they aren't any more or less religious than you. whats the difference maker? its the fact that they have no hope for a better life. some of this is indeed a product of being a marginlized minority - something which you've also mentioned in your post - but most of it is from the muslims own doing - which i mentioned in my previous post as well.

india is not israel or even the US/UK. in many ways the indians have bent over backwards to accomodate the muslim minority, where US/EU nations would have told us to eff off, and israel would have just turned the gat on you.

india offers muslims hajj subsidies, tolerates cow slaughtering, etc even after countless insults from muslims such as this one.

again this isn't a discussion about morality, everyone agrees on that. its rather a discussion of why this happens. two completely different things which you've confused unfortunately from my post.

explaining why i got sick last week is different from justifying it by saying it got me out of class and was thus a good thing.

i have noticed that extremists of all stripes, and on both the religious and atheist sides have one thing in common: an event or events in their life which psychologically injures them in some way. for some it could be abuse from a parent, others it could be constant teasing for being overweight in elementary school, others it could witnessing a horrific act of violence against your community.

i can guarantee that this terrorist attack will create some BJP followers out of people who otherwise would not have become radical hindus. human beings are both a product of their genes and their ENVIRONMENT. nature vs nurture.

Violence is a sad excuse for pity you wish to receive.

terrorists don't seek pity. they are simply in it for 3 reasons: revenge, political goals, and paradise. pity is not one of them. there plenty of non-violent ways one can seek the pity of others.