This AP story calls Hemant Lakhani a "British businessman" who was evidently meeting someone from a "Somali militant group." Nowhere do they think it important for you to know that Lakhani is a Muslim who was hoping to "launch a 'jihad' against a U.S. commercial airline." This is just one example of why the American public in general continues to be so woefully uninformed about the threat of jihad terror: case after case like this is reported as if it had nothing to do with Islamic jihad at all. The struggle, we are led to believe, is against the shadowy bin Laden and his band of fanatics, and that's all. The possibility that such people as Hemant Lakhani, motivated apparently on their own by the jihadist imperative, could even exist is never considered -- or allowed to be considered.
"Briton Gets 47 Years in Jail for Missile Plot," from AP, with thanks to DC Watson:
NEWARK, N.J. — A British businessman convicted of trying to smuggle shoulder-launched missiles into the U.S. was sentenced Monday to 47 years in prison, effectively a life sentence for the elderly man.The alleged plot involved the sale of missiles to a group that Hemant Lakhani, 70, thought would use them to shoot down commercial airliners. The weapons' buyer and seller were actually government agents.
Lakhani was convicted in April of attempting to provide material support to terrorists, unlawful brokering of foreign defense articles and attempting to import merchandise into the U.S. by means of false statements, plus two counts of money laundering....
Lakhani's trial defense hinged on the argument that he was the victim of government entrapment.
He was arrested in August 2003 at a hotel near Newark Liberty International Airport where he had been meeting with a government informant posing as a representative of a Somali-based militant group.
The government asserted that Lakhani planned to arrange the sale of at least 50 more missiles after the sale of the first one.
UPDATE: It has been brought to my attention that there is some question about whether Lakhani is actually a Muslim or not. You can see from the link above that my source for thinking so was a Reuters story reproduced in the Daily Times of Pakistan. Others have pointed out that his is not a Muslim name, although it has been elsewhere reported as Hekmat and Hemad -- Muslim names. It seems that if he is not a Muslim, he is a mercenary and opportunist, but in any case, the confusion about this may, in all fairness, explain why AP and other sources say nothing about his religion.
The entire emphasis -- hysterical emphasis -- on terror plots and terror threats and deeds of derring-do to foil such plots, misleads. Terrorism could cease altogether, but that would not make the threat of islamization less potent -- it might even make it more so. It is Islam itself, what Islam has meant over 1350 years, how it has conquered, what its adherents have done to the non-Muslims they conquered, and the effect of Islam itself on the Believers, what it has meant for them, that needs to be discussed and which, in all the talk of a "war on terrorism," is overlooked or ingnored.
But surely those who are Muslims are not genetically inferior to Infidels; surely the explanation for the failures of those who call themselves Muslims to make any discernable contribution, over nearly the last thousand years, to world civilization, in art, in science, in thought, is to be attributed not to genetic failures (though marriage with cousins is not exactly advisable for those taking the temperature of their gene pool) but to what we may primly call "cultural factors" -- i.e., Islam itself, and how it both bans outright many forms of artistic expression, and free and skeptical inquiry are discouraged at every step, so that the habit of mental submission that Islma encourages extends to other areas. Thus the crazed conspiracy theories, the effect of rumors, makes the populations of Muslim countries equivalent to a town full of primitives, simmering with rage, and at a moment's notice inclined to be whipped up to lynch-mob fury at the Infidels or those who, as the enemy, are promptly and necessarily labelled as "infidels."
The more one studies what those whose profession it is to teach High Islamic Civilization, and thus have both a professional and a personal stake in believing it to be far more impressive and interesting than it may have been (and if those same people had much knowledge of what was going on in Europe, now that the "Dark-Ages" mythology has been put paid to, or to China, they might be less impressed with "Islam" and its putative wonders), the more one sees that the contributions were often those of Jews and Christians, or of those who had converted but had been mentally formed in a non-Islamic environment, or by those Muslims who were practically heterodox, such as the scientist ar-Rhazi, or that those contributions took the form of borrowing (papermaking from China -- see Dard Hunter; algebra from India -- see any history of mathematics) rather that original creation, at least after the first two-three centuries, before the gates of ijtihad, in more ways than one, slammed shut.
I am amazed that none of the nations papers said that this guy Lakhanni is a MUSLIM, all referred to him as a "British Businessman born in India". Now all pieces of the puzzle fall into place. Why do the papers hide the fact he is a Muslim, I dont think an Indian Hindu would have done something like this. It's always the Muslims who want to create mayham all over the world.
With reference to Hugh's article above. Yes the Islamic culture does not allow any initiative for growth or to expand knowledge. According to them the holy book cover evey facet of human life including defecating. That is why there has been no contribution whatsoever to better the human conditon. One has to only look at all the Islamic countries in the world to see this sad situation. They are still living in the 7th century. The only Muslims who live fairly well are the ones who have crept in uninvited to the west.
The revisionist history ( talk) of a 'golden age" of Islam is completely false.
If this were really true, then how come the Spanish fought so hard to kick the Muslims out? Muslims cutlivate the myth of this golden age,in fact it was was a barbarous, cruel and evil regime.That is why the spanish kicked them out. It was the Romans in Spain who built the aqueducts and fountains, centuries before the muslims employed locals to build the Alhambra gardens.
Muslims have never been able to invent anything really useful. Partly this is because the schools concentrate on learning the Koran word by word rather than true inquiries into nature, politics, philosophy or anything. They are taught not to question but to submit, to be a slave to allah. They simply parrot the Koran over and over and over again, rather than cultivate any spirit of enquiry. It is brainwashing. This is why Islamic societies always decline rather than improve.
How many noble prize winners are Muslims? How may can claim to have invented anything to improve the human conditon? Compare that to the Jews who comprise less than 1% of the Muslims and how many of them have carved out a name in evey field of human endeavour.It is obvious that the gulf between the ignorant backward culture of mohammedinism and other faith based cultures.
Despite revisionist history, the muslims had a barbaric civilisation of slavery, cruelty & terror, it was the dark ages. Books of Greek learning were translated into Arabic by Christians in Lebanon. So it was that they had books by Ptolemy and Aristotle and Galen on Medicine, Algebra, Geometry. But they never added any new knowledge or improved upon it. A handful of Greeks invented more in a few years than billions of muslims ever did in centuries.
The muslims destroyed any books that they didn’t like the sound of, so it is that Plato and political discussions did not get wide translation. Only books on mathematics and medicine that didn’t seem to contradict the Koran were taken up and translated to Arabic. Meanwhile, the muslim hordes destroyed vast libraries in monastries and places of learning all over the middle east and other lands this maurading band of Mohemmedans rampaged on conquests stretching from Spain to India. The most notorious one was the famed library at Alexandria where the Caliph famously said to "burn them in case they contradict the Koran". When the Mohammedans invaded Egypt which was a Christian country. The Arab general was informed of the fantasic library of Alexandria, where all of human knowledge was preserved for over 2000 years.He is supposed to have sent word to Damascus where Caliph Omar ordered that all the books in the library should be destroyed because, as he said "they will either contradict the Koran, in which case they are heresy, or they will agree with it, so they are superfluous." Thereafter, the illiterate and sadistic Mohamedians took all the books and scrolls out of the library and distributed as fuel to the many bathhouses of the city. So enormous was the volume of literature that it took six months for it all to be burnt to ashes. What a tragedy - that was the golden age these barbarian Mohommedans speak of.
Hemant Lakhani is not a Muslim guy, but a Hindu, with no qualms for selling his soul for a little pieces of silver. For guys like him, religion, peace, or the fact that his actions would have caused wide-spread sorrows, make no difference. For such people, it is all profit.
He was well covered during his arrest here in India. If I recall correctly, he failed in many businesses, and was appeared to be desparate to make money somehow, even if it was at the cost of death of innocents.
I sincerely wish he attains peace of mind.
Only 47 years?! That means he'll be out by the time he's 117!
Hugh posted: But surely those who are Muslims are not genetically inferior to Infidels; surely the explanation for the failures of those who call themselves Muslims to make any discernable contribution, over nearly the last thousand years.
For many years I did think that the failures of the muslim/arab world could be layed at the door of islam. I'm now beginning to wonder if there is more to it then that. Not genetic I hasten to add, but cultural. It could be argued that the tribal Bedouin mindset - nomadic existence, fierce clannishness, carrying out raids on other tribes, carrying off women as booty - are all codified in islam. Mohammed after all was the perfect Bedouin nomad.
DP111;
Given the high rate at which marriages take place between 1st and 2nd cousins, there may be some genetic component as well as the socio-cultural component that is common to any relatively closed society. Imagine the potential for major psychiatric and personality disorders where you have a lot of in-breeding.
I should have added that I believe that the nomadic culture of the Arab tribes gave rise to islamic attributes rather then islam itself. The tribal mindset came first - islam is just a codification of it to a set of la3ws that could be arbitrated over. So in some ways, the muslim arab can justifiably claim that the codification of those customs into a set of laws, was certainly better then before.
Well all this is fine for 7th century Arabia. It certainly is not fine for other places around the world.
waterdragon52 posted:Given the high rate at which marriages take place between 1st and 2nd cousins, there may be some genetic component as well as the socio-cultural component that is common to any relatively closed society.
There is that. Has there been any study on this? Does the Arab world suffer more then the average, as regards mental instability? (I know you will be smiling right now, just as I'm doing) - You will say ,"Look at the evidence in front of your eyes". Seriously though, is there any evidence of increased mental instability in the arab world?
What I'm saying, is that not everything can be laid at the door of mohammed and his epileptic visions. What could be argued, is that mohammed codified the rather fierce customs of marauding tribes operating in a very hostile environment. In that sense he brought realtive civilisation to a very barbaric culture. But this is only in comparison to what was before. So when muslims claim that all was Jahalliya before islam, they are right for 7th century Arabia but not anywhere else.
From a secular standpoint, there is of course, no justification for islam in any part of the world except maybe in conditions that resemble those of 7th century Arabia. There are no such conditions anywhere in the world today, and as such islam is superfluous to requirements. In fact it is a "luxury" we just cannot afford, for love, life or money.
Robert,
I was really intrigued by this article, especially due to the name of the person accused. Hemant is a typical Hindu name (it actually means autumn in sanskrit)and although the Paki paper used the word 'Muslim' in the headlines the body of the news contained no such references. We know about this guy, this case was widely covered in the Indian media (2002?). I would suggest that whenever you come across an Indian name you also check out the Indian media (which is way bigger)and not only Paki media. It is not unthinkable that a Hindu would be involved in such a plot. There are some who would do anything for money. There are others who profess a viceral hatred for the US because they are hardcore leftists. Unfortunately there are also others who are die hard nationalists and are none too enamoured of the US (sometimes justifiably so). This is because whenever India or the Hindus had tried to act decisively against Pakistan or International Jihadi Organisations (whose activities are mostly routed through Pakistan, Bangladesh) it is the US Govt. which has always thrown the spanner in the works. The US has always appeared as the bulwark of protection for Pakistan and it's corollary - international jihad. If it hadn't been for the US Pakistan would have been totally dismembered and large parts of it annexed after the 1971 war. It is the US which compelled India not to open other fronts during the 1998 Kargil war and invade Pakistan, using dire threats of extreme economic sanctions. I don't know what 'great game' the US is playing but the totally uninvolved common US citizen is paying a 'great price' in terms of both life and goodwill. There are many US citizens in this good forum. I'd be extremely interested to know their views about this matter.
Response to Mitra, The US is not averse to India or have acted in any way in the past against India. When the cold war was on, India with a few other (socialist) states formed the so called 'non-aligned nations group" This group in fact was not impartial but aligned towards the USSR & China. Each year when they had their (comedy) non-aligned summit, a rash of proposals condemmnig the actions of Western democracies were promulgated, but never the USSR or the communnist block countries were attacked although there was a lot of human rights abuse, until China attacked India, then India realized she was alone.The non-aligned nations were a running joke - countries such as Libiya, Sri Lanka, Cuba, Egypt were all aligned to the socialist block, at that time Pakistan decided to join the western block and stayed there all the time to her own advantage including the time of the Soviet Invasion of Afganistan, you know what happened then on. Now the relationship with Pakistan "its like the hand that one cannot cut off, one has to kiss".
Hindus in India are suspicious of American foreign policy in South Asia, which any time may take a tilt in favour of Pakistan making India adversory. Before 9/11, US Govt. and citizens were dangerously ignorant of evilness of Islam,and have heavily paid for it. For Hindus in India, Kashmir is in fact a survival issue against Islam. Hindus in India are continuously fighiting Islamic tyrrany for the last 1000 years. Although India attained political freedom on 15Aug.1947, Hindus are yet to attain freedom from Islam. Babri mosque demolition on 6thDec.1992 was one step forward in that direction. US govt. should not waste public money on keeping Lakhani in jail,instead he sould be sent to Iraq/Afganitan to fight terrorists there. Any attempt by Lakhani to escape will be answered by a bullet fired by US troops.
This guy ia a Hindu alright and a Sindhi at that... Hes exhibiting typical Hindu myopic behaviour. Itdoesnt matter to this maggot that his community (the Sindhis) have been exiled forever from their ancestral land by the Muslims... Terrorism and illegal Muslim immigration florishes becoz local Hindu officials put profits before national intrests. Most Commie Hindus are concerned with "Palestinians" but they dont seem to share the same concern for Kashmiri Pandits.
It'd b much better if this guy had converted to Islam. being a British Hindu i cant tsand the shame...
Iqbal: Hindus in India are suspicious of American foreign policy in South Asia.
I dont know abt US but Indians sure hate Britain when it come to foreign policy. I remember the scronful looks i got when i mentioned to a few RSS guys that i was a Briton. Labour has been harping to Muslim tune (for Pakistani vote ofcourse) on Kashmir. Only recently have UK and EU changed their stance on Kashmir.
Its high time our politicians realise our foreign policy cannot be held hostage to Muslims.
Mediveal and modern Indian history taught to Indians is fradulent. 1958 Sepoy Mutiny is taught as FIRST WAR FOR INDEPENDENCE. This communicates as if hindus before British arrival in India were indpendent. It also negates freedom fighters like Maharana Pratap, Shivji Maharaj,Banda Bahadur and so many others. This is height of Muslim appaesement in Independent India. The real slavery of Hindus was(and is) Islamic one, British peroid was mainly of economic exploitation and it was modern European education along with English language which enabled Hindus to become independent after more than thousand years of(mainly Islamic)slavery. Poor RSS guys are victims of this (politically correct) history taught to them. Even today Hindus of India pay Jizia in the form of 150 crore rupees of Haj subsidy. Dhimmitude zindabad!
Mediveal and modern Indian history taught to Indians is fradulent. 1958 Sepoy Mutiny is taught as FIRST WAR FOR INDEPENDENCE. This communicates as if hindus before British arrival in India were indpendent. It also negates freedom fighters like Maharana Pratap, Shivji Maharaj,Banda Bahadur and so many others. This is height of Muslim appaesement in Independent India. The real slavery of Hindus was(and is) Islamic one, British peroid was mainly of economic exploitation and it was modern European education along with English language which enabled Hindus to become independent after more than thousand years of(mainly Islamic)slavery. Poor RSS guys are victims of this (politically correct) history taught to them. Even today Hindus of India pay Jizia in the form of 150 crore rupees of Haj subsidy. Dhimmitude zindabad!
Faqi,
I suppose you are an American. The hand that has gone gangrenous better be cut off or it afflicts the whole body with it's contamination. The Pakistani people don't exactly like America or Americns (Daniel Pearl episode, et al)but they will never challange the US from without, rather try to undermine it from within. Look what unbridled Pakistani and Bangladeshi immigration is doing to your country (Britain is already far advanced in becoming a basket case). Even a cursory study of the UN security council deliberations would prove beyond doubt whether US policy has displayed a marked aversion towards India or not. Yes, the Indians had their share of stupidity, but India's parting from the US camp also had very serious reasons. Let me give you an example (I'm involved with security studies so i'll deal only with security matters). During the 50's and 60's when India was in desperate need of arms she approached both the cold war camps. US offered to sell arms to India but refused to transfer technology and allow India to manufacture them under license. They also would not guarrantee a steady supply of spare parts. The Russians happily agreed to all the above. We had to settle for marginally inferior arms but we had an assured supply.
It might also intrigue you to know that the ambassadors, embassy officials and other officials the US sent to India were more or less closet leftists. They were more comfortable and would rather hobnob with Indian communists than with Indian nationalists. These commies would openly malign the US and then smugly apply for a US grant or scholarship and get it! The nationalists were of course 'dangerously polemical and anti US'. Now do the deductions yourself.
The US has, in the past, tried it's level best not to allow the rise of a major (super?) power in Asia. In the long run it has hurt US interests the most. Hopefully today we are seeing a new realisation in american foreign policy which would benefit both our countries.