Exhibit on jihad in Kashmir

And about time too.

An exhibit that has appendices on Taliban as well as the Afghan Heroin trade would be even more helpful in a 'connect the dots' exercise.

That way, our lawmakers can see that
#1 the jihadis doing ethnic cleansing in Kashmir
#2 the jihadis spilling shia blood in sectarian wars within Pukeistan
#3 the Taliban and al-qaeda type jihadis funded by wahabi petrodollars
#4 the jihadis running afghanistan's flourishing poppy trade, the labs that convert poppy to opium to morphine to finally heroin
#5 the jihadis who fillup pukeistan's "intelligence" agencies
#6 the jihadis bent on spreading WMDs around the moslem world as a 'guarantee of security' (the AQ Khan network)
#7 the jihadis graduating from Pak's madrassas at the rate of an estimated quarter million per year
#8 the list goes on

are all --(Gasp! Shock!)--drawn from the same gene (cess)pool.

There's little difference between the above categories of islamofascists. One jihadi gasole could be fighting fighting Indian forces in kashmir one day, find himself spraying bullets in shia mosques in lahore the next, gun running and drug running across the afghan border the third day and meeting saudi paymasters and ISI protection masters the next day.

One hopes that Indian-Americans interested in this matter will contact their Congressmen, and will begin to use their influence to make sure that the history of Muslim conquest, and Muslim destruction of artifacts and temples, and Muslim subjugation of Hindus and then, of Sikhs, will be brought home to them. For what better way to make clear to the Western world that it is nothing they, those benighted Westerners, have done, to Islam or to Muslims. Every non-Muslim group, West and East, North and South, offending or innocent, rich or poor -- it does not matter -- has been treated with hostility, even murders hostility, by Muslims whose canonical texts teach such hostility.

It is a pity that so many in India among those who are called, quite loosely and often quite comically, "intellectuals" -- all shy away from anything that might conceivably be taken as a defense of Hindu (or Sikh) civilization, or culture. Above all, no thoroughly modern Indian will dare suggest that Islam has done great damage to India, to Indian civilization. No, there are exceptions -- such as that cosmopolitan of Indian descent, V. S. Naipaul, who is not afraid of anyone. There are Indian-Americans (Hindu, Sikh, and even disaffected ex-Muslims) and their counterparts in Great Britain, who also know how silly it is not to make the case, to ignore history, or to shy away from the slightest hint of Hindutva, which is often mocked (why, exactly? Is K. S. Lal to be mocked for "The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India"? Is Sir Jahundath Sarkar? Are all the other Hindu historians of India who have been unafraid to discuss what Muslim rule did to India?

Those of us who are not Indian should find out a good deal more about what happened on the subcontinent, and cease to so readily accept the "advanced" view which holds that anything smacking of "communalism" (a word used to indicate, of course, those who wish to show their sympathetic interest in, and identification with, Hindu India, and who refuse to play the game of sanitizing the history of Muslim rule).

One hopes that those in the Western world who are articulate and aware, and of Indian (Hindu or Sikh descent, primarily) will help to educate others -- but that can only be done once one has educated onseself. Lal and Sarkar should be household words; the two volumes in which Sita Ram Goel simply lists tens of thousands of Hindu sites destroyed, should be better known. Those Indians who become internationally famous, and always -- as a matter of course -- are quick to demonstrate that they have absolutely nothing to do with "communalism" (i.e., Hindu causes, Hindu history, Hindu interests) -- one thinks here of Amartya Sen -- would do better to study their own history, and not to assume that intelligent Hindus and Sikhs who show a bit of that supposedly terrible "communalism" must be wrong. They aren't. But it is difficult for them to make their voices heard, given the received ideas, and cliches, of the day.

Thanx a ton, Hugh! All Indian Americans (non muslims) who are aware of the facts would appreciate your monologue here. Thanx a lot for the support...I was starting to feel exhausted with JW ignoring India. The situation is so pathetic.

Anyways
March on!

"I was starting to feel exhausted with JW ignoring India..."
-- from a poster above

First, thank you for the kind words.

Second, I don't think that Jihadwatch ignores India. If you wander around the JW archives I think you will find more frequent and more sympathetic mention of India, and more frequent mention of what the Muslim invasion and conquest of India meant to what became a "wounded civilization" (in Naipaul's phrase) than you are likely to find at any non-Indian website. K. S. Lal, Sarkar, Sita Ram Goel (among those so readily demonized by those who regard "Hindutva" as a curse word), Koenraad Elst, Bamber Gascoigne, Francois Gautier, and others have repeatedly been mentioned here as authorities that should be consulted on Muslim rule, and mistreatment of the native Hindus (and Sikhs, and Buddhists, and others). JW is not the Asian Society of East Bengal, and no one here presumes to be Sir William Jones, but it is strange that the history of India does not receive its due --either from most non-Indians, or -- alas -- from most Indians, including those who now live in the West, and as non-Muslims, can if they so wish easily become, without great difficulty, part of that West.

Try googling "jihadwatch" and "Posted by Hugh" and "India" and about 500 hits will come up, and you can always whittle that number down by adding one more term, such as "Aurangzeb" or "K. S. Lal" or "Sita Ram Goel" or "Hindu temples." Some of it may prove useful.