Why al-Qaeda finds no recruits in India

[ajtr]

People who can't be loyal to their religion and nation are talking about loyalty. Well people on one thread were asking for loyalty of theirs towards their new found religion.

haanji india main kuch bigots hi dharm aur country ke thekedaar bane baithe hain aur baat karte hain loyalty ki.Aur unhi main se kuch ke bhai-bandhu sriganga nagar ke uss paar bi baithe hain.waise Radcliffe line ne zameen to baant di sath main bigots bhi.Un mein se hi kuch ki "B-genes" abhi tak dilute nahi huyee. na hi east main aur na hi west main.

And i keep on replying to such "bigot genes " wale. like this one whom i ve quoted.

 

[SQ8]

After 65 years, number of Indian Muslims is equal to total people in Pakistan. In a country with 80 % Hindus, why did they spare 180 million Muslims over these years ?

Hindus are biggest extremists ? Kindly tell how many Indian terrorist groups are there in the world ?
@Oscar , now if such statements are made, isn't it necessary to take actions against such flaming posts ?

Countering it would make sense, after all.. the word terrorism has become synonymous with "Boom"..
not the idea that terror is an emotion, terrifying is an adjective..
A King Cobra is terrifying.. shall we call it a terrorist?

Extremism is a different case, it is what exports terror... the extent of its export is what determines its ferocity.
So I do not agree with the posts contention that Hindus are the biggest extremists as the extremists within them do not possess the actual will to export any of their acts beyond their home ground..the old adage of "Apni gali mein ***** bhi Sher hai" comes to play.. so in that sense .. it has little to do with Hindus being the greatest extremists as very few Hindus show extremist traits.. and even less so outside their own spheres of influence.

You made a little mistake of equating Hindus with Indians.. but perhaps that is what a general understanding of Pakistani perception of India is..and hence your assumption.

But you do see some extremism in Hinduism.. so to exclude it is also unfair..
these range from disguising those sentiments in the form of opposing Muslim "appeasement" in India(whatever that is.. considering the range of issues faced by Muslims in traditionally communal states like UP and Gujrat)..or whereever Muslims start heading towards a majority...to outright statements the likes of which Thakray and his likes are famous for.

Does this lead to terror? The massacre's in Gujrat.. the Ayodha issue.. are fair examples.
But does this lead to an export of terror? NO.
So , the eventual conclusion to the false statement of saying that Hindus are the biggest terrorists is absolutely incorrect.
After all, if any one wants to know about terror and indiscriminate bombing and killing.. we have the west as the best example.
Each other, the middle east.. even our subcontinent has seen the blowing from the cannons.

Moreover, Hinduism for all its growth in India.. is still very very localized..
Islam is not.. thus if there are extremists in Islam.. their influence will be felt worldwide...and there will be many more testimonials to it, and hence more enemies for it.. and more propaganda that "blows" up these figures...and other attempts that deflate figures in defense.
Those from say Hinduism or say Sikhism.. will mostly be felt within India.. and only Indian Muslims or other minorities can testify to it...and then.. the propaganda is controlled.. and vice versa the figures and incidents can be deflated as well.

The chances of anyone hearing of a Hindu extremist terror rampage are much more remote.. then that of hearing of a Muslim extremist..
plus, Hindu's are not prone to suicidal attacks.. and nothing is louder than a bomb blast.

Flamming post??? Muslim indian terrorists groups are present but are in hiding and occasionally conduct blasts But Hindu Extremists when start killing muslims they create big massacres, Cant you see the gujrat riots, S.Express Incident, Demolition of muslim mosques and killings of muslims by shiv sena??? the only difference is your govt and other hindus support these incidents openly but muslims are in minority so they carry operations secretly.

The you should mention in your post.. CLARIFY.. that you only mean extremist Hindus.. and not all of them.
The same goes for some Indian members with bigoted ideas..

 

[KS]

The chances of anyone hearing of a Hindu extremist terror rampage are much more remote.. then that of hearing of a Muslim extremist..
.

Because they don't occur much compared to the other case ?

 

[KRAIT]

@Oscar I didn't expect you will repeat same old examples of Ayodhya and Gujrat. Do you think it was only Muslims that suffered in those riots ? Is Ayodhya issue so meaningful just because it happened few decades ago whereas thousands of temples were destroyed few centuries ago ? Is it right to accuse Indians especially Hindus for persecuting Muslims for few decades (which I doubt) but at the same time keep persecution of Hindus in centuries ago out of mind ?

Problem is that people are too much focused on few years event to generalize entire community. Ayodhya and Gujrat don't reflect Hindus mentality. The Hindus that are still happily living with Muslims and adapted according to them are the ones that are average Hindu mindset.

Hindu extremism is actually a wrong term,. Those extremists are having different goals like fighting against state for economical and social oppression than a religious angle. If you look at case of Maoists, even if consists mostly of Hindus, the religion has nothing to do with the extremism. Its the poverty and brain washing by extremists to fight the govt. by violent means.

I would like to clarify that Religion based Extremism is not popular in India like other countries. So when we talk about Al-Qaeda, which recruits terrorists on the name of religion, it fails to recruit from India. Reason been is that Indian Muslims have different outlook. Its the difference in perception, understanding of religion (wrong interpretation of Islam or Jihad is not prevalent ) and patience in Indian Muslims.

 

[SQ8]

Because they don't occur much compared to the other case ?

Duh..

1.6 billion spread everywhere, multiple governments.. multiple races.. multiple means of recording and reporting.

compared to a concentrated area.
Where there is little transparency except for media outlets geared towards showing superiority of a certain religion.
Hindu men/Muslim women..

need I point out more.

 

[KRAIT]

haanji india main kuch bigots hi dharm aur country ke thekedaar bane baithe hain aur baat karte hain loyalty ki.Aur unhi main se kuch ke bhai-bandhu sriganga nagar ke uss paar bi baithe hain.waise Radcliffe line ne zameen to baant di sath main bigots bhi.Un mein se hi kuch ki "B-genes" abhi tak dilute nahi huyee. na hi east main aur na hi west main.
And i keep on replying to such "bigot genes " wale. like this one whom i ve quoted.

You are talking about genes ? Dharm ke thekedaar to tum log bane baithe ho, saari duniya ke Muslims ke.

Bigot genes woh hain jo naa ek religion ko samajh paaye aur naa hi dusre ko. Thekedaar to tum jaise log hai jinhe lagta hai ki sare religion ki samjh tumhe hi hai aur baaki sab bigots hain. Ek religion samjh nahin aaya to dusra utha liya. Kitne religion change kar lo, kisi bhi religion ka matlab samjh nahin aana tumhe.

I can say a lot about your genes but then you will go running to few people.

 

[SQ8]

@Oscar I didn't expect you will repeat same old examples of Ayodhya and Gujrat. Do you think it was only Muslims that suffered in those riots ? Is Ayodhya issue so meaningful just because it happened few decades ago whereas thousands of temples were destroyed few centuries ago ? Is it right to accuse Indians especially Hindus for persecuting Muslims for few decades (which I doubt) but t the same time keep persecution of Hindus in centuries ago ?

Problem is that people are too much focused on few years event to generalize entire community. Ayodhya and Gujrat don't reflect Hindus mentality. The Hindus that are still happily living with Muslims and adapted according to them are the ones that are average Hindu mindset.

Hindu extremism is actually a wrong ter,. Those extremists are having different goals like fighting against state for economical and social oppression than a religious angle. If you look at case of Maoists, even if consists mostly of Hinus, the religion has nothing to do with the extremism. Its the poverty and brain washing by extremists to fight the govt. by violent means.

I would like to clarify that Religion based Extremism is not popular in India like other countries. So when we talk about Al-Qaeda, which recruits terrorists on the name of religion, it fails to recruit from India. Reason been is that Indian Muslims have different outlook. Its the difference in perception, understanding of religion (wrong interpretation of Islam orJihad is not prevalent ) and patience in Indian Muslims.

I do not disagree with you.. what you must see is that I am looking at it as a PoV to the exception.. i.e
"there are no Hindu extremists".
Ayodha and Gujrat serve as examples where it was seen in action.. what the response of the other community was.. and how it hit back at the Hindu community is also there.
But the idea that it was spurred on by extremists who also exist in the Hindu populous is what I wish to point out.

I would disagree with the idea that Indian Muslims do not have incorrect interpretations of Islam..many do.. and I meet and work with them.. as I do with Hindus and a Jain recently arrived from india every day...from Kashmir to Calcutta...Dehli to Thiruvanthpuram. But .. as far as extremist traits are concerned.. they are less prevalent due to the lack of extremist preaching through any organized effort.. either by groups or government.

 

[madooxno9]

From all this thread , what i can see and get an analogy is that Pakistan is THEKEDAAR of Muslims.. anywhere on planet earth .

You guys can't keep your house in order and you talk about others too much .

 

[KS]

But you do see some extremism in Hinduism.. so to exclude it is also unfair..
these range from disguising those sentiments in the form of opposing Muslim "appeasement" in India(whatever that is.. considering the range of issues faced by Muslims in traditionally communal states like UP and Gujrat)..

really..? you still believe that is a myth ? let me give a few examples..awe are "secular" country that has different civil laws for different religions and the Uniform Civil Code has still not be implemented even after the architect of our constitution Ambedkar (he was staunch anti-brahmanisst as well) wanting it and numerous SC judges asking the Govt to draw plans on it for just one reason...Muslims...

till the middle 80s there was no big murmurings going on..till Indira Gandhi was there...once she died and Rajiv became the PM he did the infamous Shah Bano episode where the SC order to provide alimony to an old muslim lady by her husband was met with street protests by the clergy and Rajiv gandhi chickened out by passing a legislation which went against the SC judgement..

then there are the highly sanitized and almost whitewashed history books that we study just because of one community's sentiments...

the original caste based reservations being extended to Muslims even though there is supposed to be no caste system in Islam...

The haj subsidies...

the waqf properties under the administration of the waqf itself with no govt interference while temple properties under govt control..

the recent schemes to give cash grants from govt tax money to madarsahs and maulvis instead of asking them to come to modern english education...

a highly disingenuous equation of secularism with minorityism...while muslim political parties can actively flaunt their "secular" credentials and they accepted as such, any political party that tries to speak for hindu interests will be labelled communal...

terrorists like Afzal guru not being hanged apparently as it will cause disturbance among the muslim population (Delhi CM's words)

No action whatsoever taken to rehabilitate the hindu kashmiri pandits who were the victims of a mass ethnic cleansing campaign because of the opposition from kashmiri muslims...

active encouragement of illegal migrants from Bangladesh by providing them ration cards and voter ids to treat them as a votebank..

in any riot, brushing under the carpet the activites of the muslim mobs while putting the spotlight on the actions of the hindus mobs only even though it might have been in reaction...

the list is many Oscar. Anyhow you see things from your side and I see things from my side..Not sure if the threads will ever meet.

 

[acid rain]

Indian Muslims are afraid to leave their families behind because they know they are in minority and in india hindus are the biggest extremists and would murder their families and start massacre of muslims all over india.

This is a perfect example of a flame post and deserves a similar reply, hindus and muslims have been at each others throat from a long time and this stems from Muslim or rather fundamentalist Muslim's disharmony with other religions other than his own.

Similar to India, Muslims kill Hindus in Pakistan too, but the difference is Pakistani Hindus dont fight back due to lesser numbers while Indian Hindus do and overwhelmingly too resulting in more loss of life on the muslim side.

Same goes for Muslims against Christians or Muslims against Jews, more Muslims get killed for every Christian or Jew killed by Muslims because the christians and jews are stronger.

Same goes for India, more Muslims get killed for every Hindu killed because there are more Hindus in India.

 

[KRAIT]

I do not disagree with you.. what you must see is that I am looking at it as a PoV to the exception.. i.e
"there are no Hindu extremists".
Ayodha and Gujrat serve as examples where it was seen in action.. what the response of the other community was.. and how it hit back at the Hindu community is also there.
But the idea that it was spurred on by extremists who also exist in the Hindu populous is what I wish to point out.
I would disagree with the idea that Indian Muslims do not have incorrect interpretations of Islam..many do.. and I meet and work with them.. as I do with Hindus and a Jain recently arrived from india every day...from Kashmir to Calcutta...Dehli to Thiruvanthpuram. But .. as far as extremist traits are concerned.. they are less prevalent due to the lack of extremist preaching through any organized effort.. either by groups or government.

I agree there are Hindus extremists, but there is different definition of extremists vis a vis India. People call RSS and VHP extremists, but they don't blow up people, plant bombs, etc. They are violent, no doubt, in many cases.

Hindu extremism is there but not that prevalent if you consider the lethality of actions.

I also agree that not all Indian Muslims think positive. You gave your personal experience, well I never saw extremist Muslim in India. There are bad apples in every community. I am talking in case of majority of people and their rationale. In India, general thinking, both of Hindus and Muslims, is asking for their rights and solving disputes through strikes, courts, talks etc.

Religion based killings is very less compared to caste based and money based.

In India, Hindu extremists can be defined in different ways, one those who are against Muslims and those who are divided in castes and are violent. These second type of Hindu extremists, is what I agree, are huge in numbers.Well for this second type, the word Hindu is not necessary to use.

 

[A1Kaid]

Wrong. Another important factor to consider fact that Muslims are a MINORITY here. You pull a stunt and there are more extremists on the other side rearing to shut you down or frame you anyway.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

And no, i dont find it repulsive, rather a necessity to make sure we dont down go down the same slippery slope Pakistan chose. Its necessary at least until Islam itself reforms.....or, everyone goes sufi.

This is correct and I share this perspective. Hindu majority of Hindustan is 800 million strong compare that to ~160 million Muslim minority of Hindustan, is a strong factor, the Hindu religious, cultural, political, etc forces are there to counter and suppress Islamic radicalism for the most part. However, in communal tensions Muslim neighborhoods are still better armed than their Hindu adversaries. The "unity in diversity" slogan Hindustan pushes is just propaganda rubbish giving the illusion of unity. However, if you notice in Muslim stronghold areas of Hindustan you will notice the Muslims there are more brazen and more resistant to any pressure that can be imposed by the Hindu majority.

I also think the other factor is AQ has not made a serious effort to do so to recruit Muslims there. It should be noted that there are Muslim insurgency groups in India and most noticeably the Deccan Mujahideen, so clearly Islamic militancy isn't fully suppressed Muslims there are still exercising some resistance.

 

[KS]

Ayodha and Gujrat serve as examples where it was seen in action.. what the response of the other community was.. and how it hit back at the Hindu community is also there.
But the idea that it was spurred on by extremists who also exist in the Hindu populous is what I wish to point out.

brother the Dec 6 event is not as cut and dry as you make it out to be...first of all the Kar seva at the site was permitted and it was the court which ordered the opening of the gates...secondly i believe there was no intention on breaking the structure unless the foolish mulayam singh govt ordered opening fire on the kar sevaks who had gathered in ayodhya for the shilanya dhaan..about 307 of them were killed in cold blood and their bodies dumped in the sarayu river..and this was few weeks before dec 6...these killings led to an upsurge of emotions on an issue for which enough blood has already been split over the centuries and also with the news of mass killings and rapine of hindus from Kashmir trickling in...it happened as it happened...maybe nothing can justify the taking down of the structure to you..but i do not share that perspective..to you your mosque and to me my mandir..

as regards the Gujarat issue, gujarat had always been a sensitive state and i dont know what you expected to happen when 59 pilgrims mostly women and children were burnt to death by a mob...

 

[JonAsad]

Q:- Why al-Qaeda finds no recruits in India

A:- May be because Indian muslims are not direct descendants of Arabs ? Unlike........ ....

Q:- Why al-Qaeda finds no recruits in India
A:- May be because every act of terrorism by al- Qaeda is credited to ISI at first instance by the indians- they have given up- -

 

[Azazel]

This is correct and I share this perspective. Hindu majority of Hindustan is 800 million strong compare that to ~160 million Muslim minority of Hindustan, is a strong factor, the Hindu religious, cultural, political, etc forces are there to counter and suppress Islamic radicalism for the most part. However, in communal tensions Muslim neighborhoods are still better armed than their Hindu adversaries. The "unity in diversity" slogan Hindustan pushes is just propaganda rubbish giving the illusion of unity. However, if you notice in Muslim stronghold areas of Hindustan you will notice the Muslims there are more brazen and more resistant to any pressure that can be imposed by the Hindu majority.

I also think the other factor is AQ has not made a serious effort to do so to recruit Muslims there. It should be noted that there are Muslim insurgency groups in India and most noticeably the Deccan Mujahideen, so clearly Islamic militancy isn't fully suppressed Muslims there are still exercising some resistance.

Hmm,Where is this so called Deccan Mujahideen carrying out insurgent activities.That name was a pseudonym used by LeT to claim responsibility of 26/11 attacks.Capture of Kasab later proved this group is doesn't exist and all attackers were Pakistanis.