Please clarify my doubt!

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:27 am

RAW did not yet send me any documents proving Arab involvement. I will post them here as soon as I recieve them.
 
 
Sorry for the above, but that\'s the first thing that came to my mind after reading your post.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 2:42 am

Read the papers. You will find several \'clues\'. Just today I read that a terrorrist involved in Mumbai blasts was nabbed and he reavealed that ISI holds Friday sermons in mosques in Dubai, esp for Indian muslims to indoctrinate them and to coerce them into jehad. Few gullible muslims do fall for that. Do you think that all this is happening without the knowledge of the so called Arab government?
 
 
Though India never accused KSA of funding terrorrist activites, it is always suspected. Why you may ask? The reason is simple: OIL. If we accuse KSA, they would simply cut off oil to India. It\'s easy to choke India\'s economy that way and bring India to its knees. So, though we know that they sponosor jihad, we overlook it as we have more immediate concerns than the indirect monetary support from the Saudi govt.
 
 
Another reason why India is on good terms with Saudi Arabia is that there are scores of Indians working in Arab countries. They are our strength and weakness. Through this work force India can exert some pressure on Arabs, it also increases our influence in Middle east and helps trade.
 
 
Also it\'s easier to convince KSA not to support Paksitan (by funding Pakistan) than try to stop its monetary support by threatening it.
 
 
Remember, the KSA only wants to spread wahabbism and its aim is not to destroy India, which btw is Pakistan\'s aim. The arabs send money to Pakis and Beedis, and they invest in jehad. Arabs know it, Pakis know it, India knows it and the whole world knows it.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 1:21 pm

MM, sorry to say this, but I didn\'t find any factual argument in your post to susbtantiate your accusation that Arab countries suppport terrorism in India.
 
 
About ISI organizing Friday sermons in Dubai, I\'m sure such things are happening even in India, and without the knowledge of our law enforcement authorities. These things come to light only when events like the recent twin blasts take place. So to claim that authorities in Dubai or elsewhere know of everything fishy that happens under their jusrisdiction is probably unrealistic. Also, we do not know the amount of intelligence that is actually shared between the Arab and Indian authorities, since these things are not publicised.
 
 
Regarding KSA funding Pakis and BDeshis, I\'m sure there are more high profile benefactors like USA, Japan, etc. who fund Pakistan for its \'anti-terror\' efforts :-)

. BDesh is considered among the poorest of nations and hence receives its share of monetary aid from across the world. Given this, I\'m not sure why Arab countries are singled out as sponsorers of jihad, and the same act of funding Pakistan & BDesh continues.
 
 
I have to conclude that your accusations are baseless.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Thu Oct 09, 2003 5:53 pm

We have a proactive moderator here :-)

! I posted:
 
 
\"Given this, I\'m not sure why Arab countries are singled out as sponsorers of jihad, for the same act of funding Pakistan & BDesh.\"
 
 
After moderation, it became:
 
 
\"Given this, I\'m not sure why Arab countries are singled out as sponsorers of jihad, and the same act of funding Pakistan & BDesh continues.\"
 
 
Dear Moderator, do you realize that your tinkering with my words have rendered them meaningless :-)

? Excuse me for implying that I post meaningful posts ;-)

.
 
 
While I should appreciate you for filtering out obscenities and hateful posts, it would be better to leave the grammatical and semantical errors as they are, as sometimes changing them could result in a totally different meaning.

by **Faheem** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 1:45 am

Here are some interesting reports and, also read below opinions of a member of a list I subscribe to.
 
 
http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in=world&cat=israel
 
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/israel/nuke.htm
 
 
Note the double standards. The news is posted as a dismal insignificant piece of information. No headlines! No mumbo jumbo about WMD and nuclear poliferation! No destabilization of the region! Israel\'s nuclear arsenal is clearly the U.S. Government\'s blind spot. All other surrounding (Egypt & Syria), surrounding surrounding (Iraq), and surrounding surrounding surrounding (Iran) countries have to dismantle all their weapons except for few paper planes to give Israel the supreme command in the region. The entire Middle East has to remain in its impotent sitting duck state for Israel to walk all over them like doormats.
 
 
A case in point is Israel\'s attack on Syria. A non-event. The mass media manufactures in people\'s minds that this is perfectly within Israel\'s right to defend itself. But if the reverse were to happen, that can only be an act of terror and violation of the UN Charter and an attack on a sovereign nation (big words rendered useless with their misue). Remember the mumbo jumbo about Saddam violating the UN Charter in attacking a sovereign nation (Kuwait)! God forbid that cannot possibly be the case with Israel - that is what the U.S. veto is for. And if Syria just thinks of doing anything, Israel will take care of what the U.S. Government wanted all along - to neutralize Syria. A game in which we are just pawns. It is like playing chess with the Big Blue planning an entire game ahead of time against an amateur flipping a coin in every move.
 
 
But then I must be confused. Because the U.S. Government sure wants to protect the freedom, democracy and human rights.
 
 
And of course the sleeping masses still think deterrence is to vote, wave some flags and rally.

by **indian** » Tue Oct 14, 2003 11:32 pm

Hi, Sunny! News, and how we percieve it, depends a lot on which site/newspaper we read it on! There is bound to be immense bias on where we come from, mostly and what religion we follow. What the media \'wants\' us to perceive they report. The media tries to be politically right rather than report facts, lo! We get the colored facts

.
 
 
I am producing another article from jerusalempost.com on the same topic. Let\'s simply read and \'try\' to make up our minds as to what possibly could be true:
 
 
Syria is at war with Israel and, more recently, with the United States as well. But it expects to pay no price for the terrorism it sponsors against both countries. Given the peculiar logic of the Middle East, things usually work out that way for Damascus. Last week, however, Israel launched a rare raid against a terrorist training camp on Syrian territory.The more usual practice after major provocations or terrorist attacks aided by Damascus is just to hit Syrian or Syrian-protected targets in Lebanon. This time, though, Israel was sending a signal as to how angry it is at continued Syrian bad behaviour. It does not seem a good moment for Syria to engage in an aggressive policy. The country is relatively weak militarily since the USSR’s collapse deprived it of a superpower ally and supplier of advanced weapons. In relative terms to Israel, Syrian power is probably at the greatest strategic disadvantage in the last half-century. The diplomatic balance of forces is also unfavorable. While Arab states would talk loudly about supporting Syria in a crisis against Israel, they are unlikely to do anything to help. Now would the Europeans take active measures to assist a Syrian dictatorship for which they have no political taste and which lacks the money or trade opportunities to woo them toward a more supportive stance. What especially stands out is the fact that Syria, along with its satellite state, Lebanon, is nearly surrounded by forces it views as adversaries. It turned down a chance to make peace with its southern neighbor, Israel, and get back the whole Golan Heights in 2000. Turkey, to the north, is a powerful state which pressed Syria into expelling the leader of the Kurdish terrorist group by threatening an all-out attack a few years ago. Jordan is friendly to the West and has itself suffered from Syrian subversion. Most recently, Iraq, to the east, has been occupied by a US-led coalition. The leaders in Damascus saw how quickly the neighboring dictatorship fell. The United States, the world’s most powerful country, is now on its doorstep for a long time and with a big army. The kind of response one would expect to such a situation would be caution. A country that is weak and surrounded by powerful neighbours would try to defuse the threat by compromise and concession. THIS IS not, however, the way things work in the Middle East. Instead, the Damascus regime screams defiance and escalates. In the regional way of doing things, weakness is a time to deter through ferocity, to intimidate would-be enemies who would respond to retreat by getting tougher themselves. True, there are some tactical acts of cautiousness — restraining Hizbullah a bit, for example — but these are mostly limited to empty promises. Before the war, Syria falsely promised the United States to close its illegally functioning pipeline — which violated UN sanctions — to Iraq. After the war, Syria made and broke a promise to close the terrorist groups\' offices in Damascus, where these groups receive government financing, training, and technical help.
 
 
Moreover, despite US demands, Syria gave refuge to high-ranking Iraqi war criminals and possibly hid Iraqi weapons of mass destruction materials. But what stands out most is an absolutely startling new development: Syria has become a state-sponsor of anti-American terrorism. There are recruiting offices and training camps on Syrian soil for terrorists seeking to kill Americans in Iraq. They are armed, transported, and probably subsidized by the Syrian government. Yet, so far the only US response to this war on America is some cautionary words from the United States and proposals to pass congressional resolutions tightening economic controls on that country. This Syrian policy is a product of its long-term style and strategy but is also the course set by the country’s relatively new and young president Bashar Assad. In effect, Assad is saying to the United States: What are you going
to do about it?
 
 
Correctly assessing that the United States does not want
to attack Syria, he believes he can get away with such behavior. Indeed, this country, which is one of the world’s most consistent sponsors of terrorism and most repressive dictatorships, currently sits as an honored member of the UN Security Council in the midst of a \"war against terrorism.\"
 
 
Israel, however, does not enjoy the luxury of watching its deterrence with Syria decline. Of course, Israel does not want war with Syria, but Assad’s statement disguises the fact that Syria is fighting a war with Israel. Either the attack on the terrorist training base in Syria was a one-time warning or it is part of a campaign to pressure Syria into clamping down on the Lebanese Hizbullah and the Palestinian terror groups it sponsors. Syria is in a poor position to respond openly. Its retaliation comes, as has been true for so long, by covert means, mainly through more terrorism. The continuation of Syria’s radical policy will lead to that country’s on-going strategic weakness and economic stagnation. But the Syrian government is quite willing to pay that price as long as it remains in power. And unless directly overthrown by outside forces, as the experience with Iraq shows, regime survival in the Middle East is not at risk no matter how badly it manages the country. Still, one wonders whether there might not be a point where the pressure is high enough that Assad, perhaps at the insistence of his powerful, older advisers, decides that a bit more caution is a worthwhile strategy.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:27 am

Great! All the \'reports\' of KSA and other Arab nations sponsoring terrorrism are BS and CIA, RAW, Mossad and the KGB (FSB) do not know anything. They are defunct intelligence agencies. And all the news reports that appear on the internet are bull shit. Why? \'cos you believe so! You just post what you believe, just your beliefs, nothing more than that. What next? Ask for proof of Paksitan sponsoring terrorrism in India?
 
 
Go figure out why the US has with-held 28 pages of its 9/11 report which details the involvement of the Saudi Royal family and the funding sources.

by **indian** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 8:08 am

LOL. Ask whom MM? Again your choice will be depending upon what you want to believe in and whom you want to believe in.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Wed Oct 15, 2003 1:53 pm

MM, I don\'t necessarily mean to BS the \'reports\' (if they do exist) of great insititutions you mention (CIA, etc etc.) but I wanted to know if you have reason to believe what you believe, in response to which you cited some reason (Friday sermons) which really doesn\'t susbtantiate your claim. If you say the official position of Arabs on Kashmir is different from ours I would agree, as their stance in OIC, UN and other forums is well known. Doesn\'t mean we have to hate them for that, as even US and other countries have a different position on Kashmir which is not same as India\'s. But if you say the Arabs follow a policy of terrorism against India, I would like to know the basis for such an allegation, because it is NOT public knowledge, unlike Pakistan\'s terrorism policy against India.

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Thu Oct 16, 2003 3:06 am

I am surprised that you do not see any Arab support for terrorrism in India. They may not be funding LeT, JeM directly (may be, but we don\'t know yet), but they are funding several madarasas in Pakistan and BD whose sole purpose is spreading terrorrism in India. Ever heard of the University of Jihad, Binur in Pakistan? It\'s just one example. There are thousands of madarasas like that which preach terrorrism, and Arabs fund them. Also the foreign policy. Every major nation in the world has condemned Terrorrism and asked Pakistan to stop sponsoring it, but not Arab nations. They never condemned Pakis. Why? \'Cos they support them. They keep India out of OIC despite having the world\'s second largest Muslim population. Says so much about the Muslim brother hood! All said, I admit that Terrorism in India or accession of Kashmir by Paksitan is not high on their list, because Arabs do not have any *love* for Paksitanis. Pakis are not Arabs, but they are Muslims. That\'s the only thing tying Arabs to Pakis and that\'s the only reason why Arabs support Pakis. The Arabs support Jihad in Kashmir because that\'s the policy that Pakistan adopted to deal with Indian supremacy.

by **jammer** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 9:33 pm

Fallacy of Phalcons
 
 
It is great if we want to secure our own house and install the security stuff, but one should know that the highest number of codes are broken in those countries who are trying to (have already sold us by now) give us these things. Terrorism is a game of the mind and no amount of technology can handle it. How will you explain the shooting of Indira Gandhi, what kind of sensor can you fix on your own bodyguard? Remember Sadaat - also shot by his own army boys? Cheers guys! Don\'t mean to depress you...

by **Mayavi Morpheus** » Sun Oct 19, 2003 11:41 pm

Who said Phalcons are to be used to fight the terrorrist pigs crossing into India? If tech is not useful in wars then should we fight with swords and spears? Anyway, please update yourself about what tech can do these days. Seems you are woefully out of touch with the latest technology. You can start with reading Kargil war stories and how India countered the pigs perched on mountains, what methods they used at the beginning and how tactics changed. Also find out what role IAF played in a ground war and why.

by **Faheem** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 5:19 am

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
 
 
Check this site and ask yourself honestly what you thought was happening and what the reality is.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Wed Oct 22, 2003 10:02 am

MM, since this horse is refusing to die :-)

, I think I rather agree with the essence of what Jammer says - high technology can always be countered and neutered by higher technologies, e.g. radars vs. stealth fighters, virus vs. anti-virus, encryption vs hacking and so on.
 
 
I know Phalcons are not meant for fighting terrorist pigs but intended for \'nobler\' missions like detecting airborne threats from long distances, be it from Pakistan or China or North Korea or Saudi Arabia. But our reliance on Israeli expertise has been more for the anti-terrorism initiatives. We want their sensors/intrusion detectors and other such gadgetry that will curb terrorists from having an easy job. We should however bear in mind that someone can always sell camouflages/shields that may enable the pigs to skip detection by these sensors - and then where are we? Back to square 1?
 
 
If you remember, US was nurturing an ambitious \'star wars\' programme to deploy a total nuclear umbrella over itself, so that any nuclear missile coming its way would be neutralised on its flight path. While defence experts were having intensive debates on the pros and cons of such a scheme, a 9/11 happened, highlighting the redundancy of such grandoise schemes. Though unfortunate, sometimes simple methods can defeat technology and make it look stupid.
 
 
Kashmir issue cannot be solved by dotting the LoC with Israeli sensors. We need to think beyond that (which is probably a topic for another thread).
 
 
One last point - I think you mentioned about OIC. Whether we are welcome there or not, WE SHOULDN\'T attempt to be members of such religious conclaves. As a Secular Democratic country, India will not be a part of any OIC or OHC or OCC (H - Hindu, C - Christian).

Who is online