I lived about a mile from the Taj. I worked for an engineering firm and freelanced as a copywriter for advertising agencies in Mumbai. Every time I got a new gig, I would celebrate by going to the Taj for a buffet or a breakfast. For a 23 year-old, it was a thrill to be able to afford the atmosphere of the Taj. To me, it was a place where aspirations found their destination. In those days, my wife to be was also a management trainee at the Taj, though we did not meet until later. For both of us, the Taj embodied the memories of youthful excitement and hopeful beginnings.

Now those memories have forever been clouded by the madness that raged this past week. We pray for those who have lost family members and wish the city back to its glamorous best.

The horrible carnage in Mumbai is sending depressing messages about the realities of the present age of terror. The first message is from the terrorists: "we have no moral conscience; in our pursuit of what we think is justice we will not balk from any form of evil that one can imagine." The horror of this message is compounded by the daring and the spectacular fashion in which the operation was carried out. The terrorists are determined, brazen, motivated, and were in middle school when 9/11 happened.

The second reality is a verdict on the complete and utter failure of the wars on terror that the US and its allies have been waging since 2001. If this is what the terrorists are capable of after being incessantly hounded by the world's major powers, then we should be preparing for a bleak future indeed.

The wars on terror that are being waged in South Asia have caused too many innocent deaths. The "targeted strikes" by US have killed hundreds of civilians in South Asia in the past few months. Many people are being tortured by law enforcement agencies. People have lost families, homes and businesses in riots by murderous gangs often protected by the government. And governments continue to avoid addressing root causes such as Palestine and Kashmir. Increasingly abuse of Islam, its values, its history and its symbols is being used as a weapon in the war on terror and this too continues to win more recruits for the extremists. All the above in conjunction with religious extremism contribute to more egregious forms of terror.

This is a wakeup call. There must be a significant rethinking in how we confront the challenge of terrorism. Current strategies have generally failed but for a few successes. The Saudis, for example, have succeeded in reducing terror inside Saudi Arabia through dialogue and re-education of youth. In Iraq, the US won over the Iraqis – the so called sons of Iraq - who had joined Al Qaeda through dialogue and political and monetary incentives. Why can't the same creative approach be brought to South Asia?

In India even those who combat hate are often consumed by hate. Pragmatism evaporates when hatred reigns. But the US and NATO can try an alternative to their current failed approach.

The final question this carnage poses is to all Indians – Muslims and Hindus alike. What kind of India do they want? India is on the verge of a historical breakthrough. At its current rate of growth it will soon be a developed nation and a major world power. But in order to sustain the growth it needs internal stability. Without internal stability it will become a land of contradictions, always on the verge but never really there.

India will need to improve its ability to deal with terrorist threats. Intelligence gathering and operational performance are not on par with the threats it faces. It must also work to restore the faith of Indian Muslims in the state, so that they work with it rather than against it. If another riot in which thousands of Muslims are slaughtered, as they were in Mumbai in 1992-93 and in Gujarat 2002, is allowed by the government, then needless to say there will be more alienation and more radicalization of Indian Muslims and the problems will only grow.

Finally, India must find the way to work with Pakistan without resorting to another war that will only make matters worse. Rejecting outright President-Elect Obama's recent offer to send President Clinton as a mediator to resolve the Kashmir conflict is not a commitment to peace. India is eager for US support and intervention in every other matter, why not in the case of Kashmir?

I dispute that your tone of despair is justified. The world has tried several approaches to combating terror, enough to know what works and what doesn't.

The worst approach appears to be appeasement. The "kid glove" approach of Israel to Palestinian terrorists, or of the Pakistani government to extremists in the frontier areas, only allowed terrorists to build a base for recruitment, extortion, and further attacks. Their demands increase in proportion to their power.

The opposite approach is military strikes by armed forces. This has some success, but fails because the military soon withdraws and the terrorists resume control of the territory. The Israel-Hezbollah and Israel-Hamas conflicts are prime examples, as well as the first three years of the Iraq Occupation.

An improvement is to try to build up, with foreign assistance, local forces to combat the terrorists. This has worked in some cultures (Saudi Arabia and Columbia, for example). However, in cultures where corruption and looting of the public trust is valued by far over civic duty, this approach fails as money vanishes and justice becomes mockery. That is the current failure of Afghanistan.

Far better is the example of foreign military and local civil partnership, with law-dedicated foreign troops working extensively with police forces at national and local levels. That is the success seen in Iraq today.

The Saudis, for example, have succeeded in reducing terror inside Saudi Arabia through dialogue and re-education of youth.

Umm, no, they did it via a thorough police crackdown on the terrorists. Dialogue and re-education are just the follow-through. Thousands of unrepentant, militant youths who refuse to participate in the re-education programs remain in Saudi prisons.

The same approach could in theory be brought to Pakistan, but that probably won't happen because Pakistan's politicians won't spend the money on public education. I'd like to see it in Afghanistan, even though Karzai is already accusing the U.S. of setting up a second government. That may be true to some extent, but his real complaint is that more money spent directly at the local level is less money that passes through his hands. The Iraqi government had similar complaints until they switched tacks and got with the program.

In India even those who combat hate are often consumed by hate.

Spoken like a true Buddhist! But we don't see much hate in India. The Mumbai police, it turns out, had not actually used their firearms in years. The attackers were Pakistanis, the product of thirty years of official Islamist indoctrination into Pakistani society, augmented by what can only be called brainwashing by their terrorist masters.

What kind of India do they want?...India will need...It must also work to restore the faith of Indian Muslims in the state...India must find -

G-d knows that I'm not a cheerleader of the Indians, but why should all the effort be from India, specifically India's non-Muslims? This attack would not have happened without the nurturing of the terrorists by Pakistan. Is it to much to expect Muslims themselves to take a hand, and accept it as a complete obligation and even a sacred duty, to help police their extremists, even at some risk to themselves?

Solomon2

'Spoken like a true Buddhist! But we don't see much hate in India.'

You are wrong. Do a google search on the Gujarat riots and you'll find hate in India. Personally, I think south-asians, in general (Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs) remain capable, even after 60 years of the partition, of carrying out the same violence against each other that occurred in 1947. In some sense, that violence went beyond simply murder and rape. As I read stories of that time, all I could see was unexplainable hate, fear and loathing.

'Is it to much to expect Muslims themselves to take a hand, and accept it as a complete obligation and even a sacred duty, to help police their extremists, even at some risk to themselves?'

It is a simple myth within western public discourse that Muslims (and Islam) have not made attempts at reform. We have, but many solutions and movements have not worked, including the much trumpeted 'liberal' variety. Your solution of foreign military and local civil partnership sounds more like an invasion to me. Iraq in 2008 is hardly a model to be replicated, even if it was feasible, in the rest of the muslim world.

'However, in cultures where corruption and looting of the public trust is valued by far over civic duty, this approach fails as money vanishes and justice becomes mockery.'

This doesn't make any sense. We're talking here about the Mumbai attacks and Muslim reform, not the Bush mis-adventure in Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and the American housing and sub-prime crisis :-)

Cheers.

I think the rhetoric of terrorism has gone far enough without someone coming to the podium and saying "hey, all of what we're trying to do to combat terrorism isn't working." Well of course it isn't working. The Mumbai attacks is just another example of previous and future events that demonstrate the frustration of Muslims.

Yes, I will denounce the attacks in Bombay (I don't like the name Mumbai) because its very clear that it was a horrible act. And yes, it villanizes Muslims, yet again. But the question can't be "how do we stop terrorist acts conducted by Muslims?" but "what do we need to do to make it stop?" And this is the question that Americans and the West do not want to answer.

I remember having a debate with a user on this website, who was obviously pro-west and kept denigrating the so-called Muslim fanatics for ruining the world. And all I could think of was, did you ever thinkg how you were ruining their lives simply on certain globals interests you have? Have you ever asked them what they're mad about? Do you actually think someone wants to kill themself for no reason other than to kill another?

I've learned throughout life that no one gets mad for no reason. There's always some force which drives a person's emotions. It could be a ridiculous reason, like your football team lost in the playoffs and now you're taking it out on your wife. But its a reason. Likewise, most people aren't crazy. The attacks in India were not done by people who were insane, psychotic or had nothing better to do on a Wednesday afternoon. It was an incident that happened by scores of people who were pissed off--pissed off at society because they don't have a voice, or because maybe no one takes their concerns seriously, or that someone killed their family or friends and they're acting out in revenge. The other events, 7/7, 9/11--its all the same damm thing.

Unfortunately I believe these types of horrid events will not stop. They'll never stop--until communication the right way is established. I mean this is nothing exceptional, nor is this isolated to Muslims specifically. If any of you are from urban cities, i.e. Los Angeles, New York, Tokyo, Chicago, London, etc. you'll realize that inner city turmoil and the plight of many people, especially the younger generations, who struggle to live in wretched settings, try to outrun their impoverished surroundings by joining gangs, stealing, dealing drugs, etc. Yes, these are bad things to get involved in--but if it's the only means to survival because you can't get an education, or get on welfare, or adeuqate housing, what do you think they're going to evenatually do? In the same respect, global terrorism is the same thing--its just carried out to a different tune.

Too many people love to talk with solutions when they don't listen to the answers. Governments across the world need to wake up that these will not be random occurences. It is an epidemic.

'I think the rhetoric of terrorism has gone far enough without someone coming to the podium and saying "hey, all of what we're trying to do to combat terrorism isn't working." Well of course it isn't working. The Mumbai attacks is just another example of previous and future events that demonstrate the frustration of Muslims.'

Agreed - I didn't mean it in that way.

Soundgarden - excellently said! People love to point fingers at 'WHO' did these terrorist attacks, while completely ignoring the 'WHY' of the issue.

Until all our governments begin to earnestly analyze the reasons behind terrorism, then combating individual groups will only lead to more 'terrorist' groups springing up in retaliation for civilian deaths, invasions, misplaced blame etc.

But govt's rarely want to admit self-interest as their foreign policy - they will trumpet the ideals of democracy, equality, civil rights while ignoring these very same principles in their own countries...

Indeed. There is only one problem. Muslims are not the only ones who are oppressed the world over. There are hundreds of religious groups and national groups that are oppressed by their governments and society at large. 95% of them don't resort to terrorism, showing up in a public square and mowing down innocent bystanders.

There is definitely something about Islam that encourages terrorism. Moslem = Terrorist. Something Islamic that makes Muslims go angry and hateful and "inhuman" to the point that they go blind with rage and violent. They can't tell left from right and just want to kill non-Muslims, innocent bystanders, dogs, cats, anything. Its not "cold and calculated" my friend, its "blind", because if you look at most terrorists......

A. they are not so super-successful in life to be so "cold and calculating" as you try to present them to be and

B. they all operate under the banner of Islam for some reason. Shouting the name of ALLAH and so forth. You seldom hear of Pakistani terrorists or Egyptian terrorists of Saudi terrorists, heck they don't even have Palestinian terrorists anymore.

Y'all Moslems have a serious problem here, so try not to hide behind oppressions as an excuse to apologize for your terrorist-inspiring religion.

And please explain to me what was so oppressed about the 9/11 and 7/7 terrorists. They were Saudis and British-born Pakis. None of them had any serious oppression or family deaths to motivate them to do acts of terrorism. They were neither Kashmiri, Palestinian or Chechnyan or Bosnian refugees of wars and what not???? Your arguments rest on flimsy bull crap.

Although there is plenty of anti-Muslim attitudes in segments of Indian society, I don't think it had much to do with the attacks, especially since the targets were Indian infrastructure along with Western and Jewish persons. Mumbai's police chief is a Muslim. The local Islamic board refused to permit the attackers an Islamic burial. The Muslims there don't seem to be welcoming this at all.

Haji--what the hell are you saying? Instead of understanding on what's actually taking place and why certain Muslims act the way they do, you've got something stuck up your ass to want to denigrate them without asking why they're upset. Nobody said they were so cold and calculating. But if it makes you mad that they were successful in pulling of an act like they did in Mumbai, that's your issue.

Meet Hajibaba--the classic douchebag, who instead of trying to understand the situation of Mumbai, 7/7 and 9/11 by putting himself in the shoes of those who actually comitted the heinous acts, wants to put them down like the rest of the rednecks without thinking. All you're doing is slandering Muslims for no apparent reason other than its the cool thing to do. Really, dude save your breath--we don't need to hear your crap. We've already heard it a million times.

Yes, Muslims have not been the only ones who have struggled to communicate to the world about their problems, whether because they don't know how to or because they're not allowed too. The Catholics in Ireland for example, had the issue for the longest time between the 1930s through the 1990s, taking up armed struggle as the IRA against England. And why were they doing it? Because the English wouldn't listen to them much less take action to appease the situation; they constantly reminded them that they were at fault, all while imposing strict regulations on Catholics in Nothern Ireland. So what else were they going to do? Would you consider them terorists? I could say that "there is definitely something about Catholicism that encourages terrorism." But that would be announcing to the world that I'm an idiot. Your accusations are just a mirror of your ignorance. What are you Haji? Why don't you tell me what religion you are and then I can figure out how to rip on you. And then you can defend yourself by calling me dense because I don't understand what your faith or ethnicity teaches.

Yes, they do all operate under the banner of Islam, because that is how they identify themselves. Maybe they don't want to distinguish between Pakistanis, Egyptians and Palestinians. Maybe to them its all the same thing. Do you know why? Or are you just blowing smoke? Islam doesn't teach nationalism--maybe that's why they don't go around saying they're ethnicity. Its the same reason why British born Muslims and Saudi born Muslims don't give a sh*t where they're from because in their eyes, they are witnessing problems that affect Muslims, not a specific ethnicity. Its what unifies them. Now whether they're reasons are legitimate is a different story. All I know is that they're mad for a reason. And people need to figure out what that reason is.

You see DoucheBaba that's why you cant understand what's going on because all you want to do is hate. There is no rationale behind you. All you see are a bunch of fanatics running around wanting to blow people up for no apparent reason. And its OK- I understand your education on international relations came from movies like Under Siege, True Lies and Delta Force and that Chuck Norris is your hero. That's cool. But why don't you leave the serious talks to the big boys. Just take your shot gun and get back in your trailer and head out to Vegas to play slots.

>>But if it makes you mad that they were successful in pulling of an act like they did in Mumbai, that's your issue.

No, actually its all Muslims' problems, but especially those of India since as usual, people will listen to these nutcases who claim they did it for Islamic glory...

And no, its not "the cause"; its "the personality" that makes people go on suicide missions. Normal people, no matter how much pressure they have to endure, do not become mass murderers nor do normal people commit suicide. 'nuff said.

Omar, I will agree with you that its all Muslims' problems. But I think its not the fact that they did this for Muslim glory. This is what the media portrays because they use habitual words such as 'Islamic' or 'Muslim' behind the word 'terrorist.' That's where the supposed glorification of Islam comes from. Realistically, there is a reason behind their suicidal bravado. Perhaps its Kashmir, maybe another cause which has caused them to pick up the gun and go after non-Muslims. But there is a reason.

As to the 'personality' which caused these men to go on suicide missions, wouldn't you agree that the cause aggravated their personality to push towards a suicidal mission? I mean some form of persuasion or understanding drove these people to commit the acts. Also, I don't know if we're in a position to understand what the reasons are behind their motives to take on such missions. Kamikaze missions in WWII served a purpose as it helped to negate American navy in the Pacific, i.e. Pearl Harbor. They basically dove into vessels carrying military supplies. It succeeded at some level. There was a reason. While I highly doubt that the terrorists in Mumbai had anything to do with extracting a military center or post, I think there message was one of publicity. In the end, and like most of these horrid events, the reasons behind their missions are never fully disclosed.

But yes, I agree with you. I think your point on personality driving these men to act the way that they did is correct

NO ONE CAN OFFER EXCUSES FOR PEOPLE WHO COMMIT TERRORISM.

Soundgarden, you are a bona fide Moron. Go flush your face in the toilet. Several times. Maybe the water rushing across it will have a "coolant effect" and your brain will start to function again.

When encountered by oppression, you have several choices, among which are:

- to pray to God for help and be patient
- protest the oppression in public
- ask for help from your rich neigbours
- publicly resist the oppression with arms as gorilla units
- randomly start blowing yourself up and other innocent bystanders

ONLY MADMEN GO ABOUT BLOWING INNOCENT BYSTANDERS.

So why is it, that most of these madmen are Moslems? Why not buddhists or hindus or christians or jews or americans or russians or ching chong hong mong pong or spanish or cubans? Muslims do not have a monopoly on being oppressed. Infact they have filthy rich Arab friends to help them out, do ching chongs have rich Arab neigbours, or the Cubans maybe???

Do other peoples commit terrorism? Sure they do. BUT THEY ARE NOT MUSLIM, idiot Soundgarden. What kind of CRAZY HUMAN BEING has such a refined sense of "Islamic Brotherhood" that he feels so strongly about his fellow Muslims being oppressed but has no sense whatsover for the innocent bystander on the street whom he happily blows up for glory and a handful of virgins in heaven????

Flush your face Soundgarden and think about this. Kamakazees were attacking American forces with whom they were at war you imbecile. Just blabbering on and on without paying attention to the context of the situation. Idiot.

Not bad but a bit reactionary, Muqtedar. As usual, judeofascists like Solomon2 are here to shed crocodile tears and complain about terrorism, odd considering he belongs to quasi-racial fraternity which sees nothing wrong with terrorism as long as they aren't on the receiving end of it. I've been told that the Chabad Lubovichers are doing "God's work" in the tradition of Mother Teresa. Last I recall Mother Teresa did her work in slums helping the poor and destitute, not living it up next to a 5 star hotel kicking it the high rollers.
Put your thinking caps on and quit drinking the kool aid, people. This was a false flag attack, right before elections. Its been done before, and they got away with it.
The RSS, VHP, Shiv Sena, Bajrang Dal, Sang Parivar have done it again.

>> The first message is from the terrorists: "we have no moral conscience; in our pursuit of what we think is justice we will not balk from any form of evil that one can imagine."

That's really what they said? Why are we ignoring the political reality? Are we ignoring them when they say hundreds of civilians are being killed by the Indian military? Or are we happy enough eating out at the Taj restaurant, celebrating our great accomplishments in a world that denies most and accepts some.

If a society or a segment of society is subject to abuse and oppression, that society will evolve into oppression. This is ridiculous and wrong, the way we as Muslims are undermining the political rights of other Muslims because we find the reactions unpalatable. Guess what, abuse is unpalatable when you're on the receiving end! Its easily ignored and justified when its some backwater we don't care to know. The message from the terrorists is simple, the western establishment is complicitly responsible for our deaths, and now we are implicitly responsible for theirs.

>> However, in cultures where corruption and looting of the public trust is valued by far over civic duty, this approach fails as money vanishes and justice becomes mockery. That is the current failure of Afghanistan.

The morally bankrupt culture is yours. The culture that wants to profit, gain and develop at the expense of the poors livelihood and dignity. The current failure is the barbarism that plays out as a result of YOUR screwed up values, YOUR persistent lies and YOUR denial of others equal righst .. at the same time satanically conveying yourself as doyern of civility.

>> Although there is plenty of anti-Muslim attitudes in segments of Indian society, I don't think it had much to do with the attacks, especially since the targets were Indian infrastructure along with Western and Jewish persons. Mumbai's police chief is a Muslim. The local Islamic board refused to permit the attackers an Islamic burial. The Muslims there don't seem to be welcoming this at all.

Disapproving of the brutality, but completely silent about the abuses on the other instance. Its not a matter of Islamic Muslim and Un-Islamic Muslim. Its a matter of dealing with the injustice JUSTLY. Lying (ignoring parts of the truth) is Unjust. Besides, the Indian military is as capable of false flag attacks as the American, Israeli and British establishment. Their citizenry are just as dumbed down when it comes to holding their government accountable for it.

"false flag" accusations without documentary proof is mere wishful thinking to help us avoid accountability for the actions of our brothers and sisters in faith. However, I do wonder how possible it is for us in a dispersed world of 1.5 billion Muslims to accomplish the hadith about doing justice to other Muslims by preventing them from doing injustice ("holding their hands from zulm").

But, opposing Indian injustice cannot allow us to fling Islamic conventions to the wind by violating prohibitions on involving civilians, sneak attacks and other things the Prophet never did or explicitly forbade in the conduct of warfare. Anyway, Mumbai is really, really far from Kahsmir, Gujrat and most other centers of the Muslim population in India. So what gives?

DoucheBaba didn't I already tell you to leave the big dicussions to us. Aren't you in Vegas yet?? What gives?

Wow! What an amazing comment! "Only Madmen blow up innocent bystanders." Did you come up with that all by yourself?? No kidding dipsh*t. That's not what I was saying in the least bit. Call them madmen and blame them for killing people--its completely true. But you have to understand the reasonings behind it. They're not just "mad" for no reason. And even if they are, there is someone who is making these people commit these acts--these heinous acts. Why? Do you know DoucheBaba? What about you Omar? Does anyone on this thread no? Probably not!!

And of course they're going to go after soft targets because its the only way they can probably make a dent in getting attention!! It certainly got your attention DoucheBaba. This is what I'm talking about. People like this red neck who I unfortunately have to respond to because they just don't get it!! No one is saying that what these people are doing is legitimate, nor is it justified. But in their eyes it is. Why? That's the question no one can respond to especially the government. They never say "hey I wonder what's the deal with these nuts? Why do they continue to attack our places of interests?" This has nothing to do about being emotional. Being emotional is the absurd comments that these countries make after incidents like these where they do the usual dog and pony show of condemming the acts, giving us some ra ra pep talk on how we plan to combat terrorism and vow to stp all of them, when in fact there is no way in hell they could ever stop these acts unless they figure out what the problems are. So instead people like DoucheBaba only fixate on the aftermath which of course gains all the notoriety so he and his dumb hick friends can berate Muslims. Frankly, I don't care if he does, because we all know he's a dumbass who really comes to this site to chastise anything which is credible or worthy to say because it doesn't follow his redneck philosphy. Go check out some of his other postings on the other subjects. Its all the same crap he probably learned from FOX news and now wants to show off his 8th grade education by coming here and vindicating all remarks without actually reading any of the posts. What do you think Douche?!! I'm pretty much on target right? That's why you say things like they probably killed the bystanders for glory and a couple of virgins in heaven, right?

HEY EVERYONE--DOUCHEBABA THINKS THAT TERRORISTS KILL FOR GLORY AND HOT CHICKS IN HEAVEN! Wow dude-- what an astounding analysis on Islamic terrorism. I think you should present at Georgetown next week on your pearls of wisdom. I think the political scientists and government intellects may give you an award.

I'll be watching for you douche. You keep the postings coming and I'll be there to make sure everyone can see your confederate flag somethered all over your writings. And that's being figurative in case you didn't get that jackass.

Just so you know, from what hajibaba has mentioned about himself before, he's an Indo-Pak Muslim living in the UK... I'm not even sure he would know what a confederate flag is.

Omar, the guy lives in a delusional fantasy of hate without reason. There is no rationale with this Nazi. And trust me--he's not an Indo-Pak. He's just some religious bigot throwing punches wildly in the dark. I mean if you want to criticize do it with constructive reasoning and answer the premise to one's arguments and understand the other side to a point.

I agree--all of these acts have been conducted by madmen. Moreover, its not acceptable. And I'm not one of these conspiracy theorists who say that 9/11 was committed by the Jews or by the Bush administration or other theories. They were Muslims who did it. But most Muslims do not agree with these actions. I'm sure 99.9% of the Muslim world would probably agree to this. So when you hear people like this fool writing posts on the wall that Islam encourages jihad and advoactes violence although most people on this post clearly state that they do not believe in that philosophy, you start to realize that people like him are the cancer to building bridges.

>"false flag" accusations without documentary proof is mere wishful thinking to help us avoid accountability for the actions of our brothers and sisters in faith. However, I do wonder how possible it is for us in a dispersed world of 1.5 billion Muslims to accomplish the hadith about doing justice to other Muslims by preventing them from doing injustice ("holding their hands from zulm").<

The only wishful thinking here is on your part. Being a member of army you should know what black ops and false flagging are about. Screaming "al-queda," emails from the "deccan mujahedeen," are not evidence. Among the many people killed in Mumbai last week were some of the City’s top anti-terror peace officers. Hemant Karkare, head of India’s Anti-Terrorism Squad, was the most notable figure to be killed in action, and his story is doubly significant, because he was in the middle of unraveling a False Flag terror attack(despite threats from the VHP and RSS), (which occurred on September 29, 2008), and was initially blamed on Muslims, such as the “Students Islamic Movement of India” (SIMI) or the “Indian Mujahideen”. Turned out it was RSS, Shive Sena types who were behind it. Good thing theres more evidence emerging in the Hindi and Urdu press, which will eventually find its way in the English papers.
Oh, and since when did you start taking Hadith seriously?

>Anyway, Mumbai is really, really far from Kahsmir, Gujrat and most other centers of the Muslim population in India. So what gives?<

So what if they're "far" from Mumbai? You really don't know much about the subcontinent do you? LoL
Good thing Indians are nowhere near as gullible as Americans and Brits. They ask tough questions(how many Muslims wear rakhee?) and demand answers, unlike the sort of feeble minded lemmings who believed
that Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

we don't see much hate in India. The Mumbai police, it turns out, had not actually used their firearms in years.
You are wrong. Do a google search on the Gujarat riots and you'll find hate in India.

I did. Didn't find anything about Buddhist involvement there. In any event, my statement was relative to the expectations Muslims have of violence in an equivalent Muslim-dominated city, like Karachi. Unlike Pakistani law enforcement, the Indians had no expectation of violence from their own, and thought that was all what they needed to guard against.

I think south-asians, in general (Muslims, Hindus and Sikhs) remain capable, even after 60 years of the partition, of carrying out the same violence against each other that occurred in 1947.

They are partitioned, so there isn't nearly the same opportunity, hence capability, to do so. I dispute the implication that the parties involved were equally to blame at all times. Nor do I think India has developed the terrorist projection capabilities Pakistan has developed since the 1970s.

It is a simple myth within western public discourse that Muslims (and Islam) have not made attempts at reform.

I wasn't talking about reform, I was talking about policing. Why does that strike you as reform, asifsheikh?

Your solution of foreign military and local civil partnership sounds more like an invasion to me. Iraq in 2008 is hardly a model to be replicated -

As the French, Kuwaitis, Iraqis, and others describe, invasion can be liberating - if it's the Americans who are in the lead doing it. Why not reproduce the model elsewhere? Do you have a better suggestion about what to do about Somalia and its pirates?

This doesn't make any sense. We're talking here about the Mumbai attacks and Muslim reform

The author's discourse struck me as a bit too narrowly focused, so I brought up the general case with examples for comparison, thinking it might be useful.


********

I've been told that the Chabad Lubovichers are doing "God's work" in the tradition of Mother Teresa. Last I recall Mother Teresa did her work in slums helping the poor and destitute, not living it up next to a 5 star hotel kicking it the high rollers.

DrM, whatever distorted picture you have of Chabad House, Lubovichers, or "high rollers", what does that have to with a Muslim response to the Massacre? Are you suggesting that tears shouldn't be shed for these people, or that they are unworthy of sympathy by Muslims?

The morally bankrupt culture is yours. The culture that wants to profit, gain and develop at the expense of the poors livelihood and dignity.

I'm not the one drinking kool-aid here, for the culture you describe isn't mine.

The current failure is the barbarism that plays out as a result of YOUR screwed up values, YOUR persistent lies and YOUR denial of others equal righst .. at the same time satanically conveying yourself as doyern of civility.

I think that history shows that barbarians will always find whatever cause they need to "justify" their actions, whether they are real or not. At some point people understand that they are just bullies, out to rob people of life or property for a quick dividend of money or power.

The culture you have described above, where the victim is always to blame, is one where competing groups, in order to exist at peace, must make arrangements among themselves based on relative power and suitable alliances as a deterrent. That's a tribal jungle, not a society of laws. Although I know this approach can work, it isn't for me; I don't want to live my life as either somebody's master or someone else's slave, nor do I want to be compelled to accept someone's narrative as "truth" just because they have the power to beat me up if I disagree. Is that what you want?