Comments on: Mumbai terror attacks: an anti-Hindutva motivation?

By: jo

jo — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 00:57:51 +0000

jinmaro, that Global Research article on the Mumbai terror attacks you linked to @ 155 is pretty crap – just unreferenced assertions mixed with bitsa newspaper reports etc. A 9/11 truther – “it’s all the CIA” – 9/11, Bali, London, Mumbai.

I bet Yanks and the CIA just wish they were still that influential.

By: Posey

Posey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 20:33:02 +0000

Yeah, Adrien, the British shafted and plundered India big time and for long time.

This is a great book on this.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IA27Dj01.html

By: GregM

GregM — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 11:22:32 +0000

The roots of conflict today between Muslims and Hindus within and between these two brutally created nation states lies in the way the British partitioned India as their rule ended in 1947 and all that flowed from that.

If you knew anything at all about the history of the subcontinent, which you don’t, you’d be aware that the roots of the conflicts between Muslims and Hindus within and between these two brutally created nations has a great deal more to do with the activities of Mahmud of Ghazni and his successors than to the way the British partitioned India.

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:45:28 +0000

Ummmm Gregm chose NZ as an example, I chose Australia. Independently of each other. True dinks. Trans-Tasman affection is stronger then fush und chups.

By: Ambigulous

Ambigulous — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:37:48 +0000

Posey and Adrien,

It’s a a tad over-simplistic to blame most of the post-independence antagonism between Pakistan/India on the departing British. Was Partition chosen by local nationalists? Yes, by some (not all). The conflicts and severe differences already existed in the region. They were scarcely invented by the British. Horrendous storms of murder during Partition, but I doubt many British were murdering. Please consult the ghosts of Jinnah, Ghandhi, and dozens of other nationalist leaders, before making this easy (and erroneous and libellous) charge against the Brits.

BTW, do you believe Britain deliberately divided Australia into warring States, or did the colonists themselves have some say in it??

By: Posey

Posey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:34:32 +0000

To close the circle on the “hidden” or other dimension referred to I feel I should recommend at the very least the following three texts.

Pardon me, while out of sight I willingly and abjectly swoon at the very mention of these genius’s names.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_M._Young_(academic)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Denial_of_Death

http://www.radicalphilosophy.com/default.asp?channel_id=2191&editorial_id=11225

By: GregM

GregM — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 10:31:16 +0000

Yes true. The British had a policy of organizing their ex-colonies into dysfunctional shitholes of ethnic conflict to help keep ‘em from, um, competing. How nice of them.

Well I suppose that’s one way to describe New Zealand.

When do you think you can get around to posting a link to this British policy so that we can all see it?

By: Adrien

Adrien — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 08:01:33 +0000

Posey – Cheers for that.
.
The roots of conflict today between Muslims and Hindus within and between these two brutally created nation states lies in the way the British partitioned India as their rule ended in 1947 and all that flowed from that.
.
Yes true. The British had a policy of organizing their ex-colonies into dysfunctional shitholes of ethnic conflict to help keep ‘em from, um, competing. How nice of them.
.
Important to consider at least two other things. One is that chunks of India were under Muslim rule before the Brits arrived. Another is the fact that India was not a ‘nation’ in the sense we commonly use. Ghandi had to create one effectively. And he used the Hindu religion to do it. The law of unintended consequences then applied – D’oh!
.
Why can’t people … Just. Be. Nice.

By: Posey

Posey — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:53:00 +0000

Adrien, Friedrich Dieterici, Professor of Arabic in Berlin mid to late 19th century translated M and the English translations from that were done in mid 20thC by R.A. Nicholson. Read his ‘Literary History of the Arabs’ and your life will be well lived.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynold_A._Nicholson

By: Adrien

Adrien — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:35:38 +0000

Posey – Methinks Liam’s a mick, they don’t know what sectarianism is.