Surprise, surprise: a possible Saudi connection to the Mumbai massacre. Are the "Indian Mujahideen" and the "Deccan Mujahideen" one and the same, or related in some way? Not necessarily, but that there would be a Saudi hand in the jihad in India at all is both unsurprising and something that bears further investigation.
A September article from the Times of India: "Saudi detained on suspicion of funding Indian Mujahideen," from the PTI, September 28 (thanks to Jeffrey Imm):
NEW DELHI: A man from Saudi Arabia was on Sunday detained by police at the Indira Gandhi International Airport here on suspicion of funding the terror outfit Indian Mujahideen suspected to be behind serial blasts in Delhi and other cities.The person was taken into custody by the sleuths of Delhi Police and Intelligence Bureau at around 8:30am as soon as he reached here from Jeddah, sources said.
The suspect is being questioned at an undisclosed location and investigators are trying to ascertain if he has any role in the funding of the terror outfit, they said.
The Indian Mujahideen has been accused of carrying out several serial blasts in Delhi, Ahmedabad, Jaipur and Uttar Pradesh.
Police and the Intelligence Bureau are trying to ascertain the funding channel of Indian Mujahideen, a module of which has been cracked following the September 19 gunbattle in south Delhi's Jamia Nagar....
No one should be surprised that proceedings from the Saudi "Jizyah for Oil" program have been spent to murder infidels.
But will the West turn a blind eye to yet another piece of evidence of what its Saudi "ally" is really up to? Of course it will. We can count on the Bush family, Tony Blair, Micheline Calmy-Rey, Gordon Brown and the usual dhimmis to keep helping their buddies.
They say the Indian intelligence service is actually quite good when freed of PC shackles. They can most certainly be of great assistance to the U.S. if we ever stop our perverse fawning over Puke-istan.
The words from 'Lord of the Rings' comes back to me more often these days, "What can men do against such reckless hate?"
ozgal
don't quote Jackson's movie of 'Lord of the Rings' - check out the original book.
Here's what Tolkien actually wrote, in The Two Towers, part one, chapter 7, 'Helm's Deep':
"It is said that the Hornburg has never fallen to assault,' said Theoden, 'But now my heart is doubtful. The world changes, and all that once was strong now proves unsure.
How shall any tower withstand such numbers and such reckless hate?..." {In the book, the defenders of Helm's Deep are rescued by 1. Gandalf coming back with extra forces and 2. a moving forest of Treebeard's Ents, which disposes of the Orc army with remarkable speed and efficiency - read it, it's brilliant - I was MOST annoyed that Jackson left out the Ents' part in the rescue}.
I commend the whole of the book - Lord of the Rings - NOT the films, or only after one has read the book - to any jihadwatcher who's feeling disheartened.
Rhys Jones, who played Gimli the Dwarf in Jackson's film version of LTR, got into quite a bit of trouble, as I recall, for pointing out the un-PC obvious: that the struggle against Sauron and his armies of darkness, in Tolkien's fictional Middle Earth, bore a striking resemblance to the real-life struggle against Jihadi terrorism.
(Indeed, the rocky and arid mountain desert landscape of Mordor [I am sure the half-pun with 'Murder' is entirely intentional on Tolkien's part] with its Dark Tower in the centre, located in the south-east of Middle Earth, has a curious resemblance to a certain real-life desert land, south-east of Western Europe, that has been and remains a source and a focus of all kinds of Evil, including slavery..I refer to the deserts of Saudi Arabia, Mecca and Medina, the Kaaba and the House of Saud).
The parallels are unsurprising: Tolkien was a devout Catholic and a philologist with a special passion for early and high medieval language and literature; he would have been well aware of the details of Christendom's 1300-year resistance to Muslim Jihad.
Get a bicycle! Stop using your car! No more money for oil.
HA! Thank you for that, DDA. I've never read any Tolkien or watched any of the Lord of the Rings movies, but I will never forget this asshat idiot revert who couldn't have been more than 25 who had a debate with some imam against Robert Spencer and Ali Sina in Frontpage. Sina and Spencer thoroughly handed them both their asses, and her response? "'What can one do against such reckless hate?' -Tolkien." You made my day. Here's the link if anyone wants to read it: http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/Read.aspx?GUID=3DDB4AD9-F928-4EF8-ADEC-8A9C90594254
It's pretty amusing because, not only do Spencer and Sina argue their points incredibly well, but it's as if these two have the textbook of how to debate infidels through evasion, denial, and logical fallacies right in front of them, and they ran down each step one by one.
"Are the "Indian Mujahideen" and the "Deccan Mujahideen" one and the same, or related in some way?"
I would call this a distinction without a difference. Those who might be charged with the job of tracking them down or following the money or arms trails, etc., might be interested in the details, but for the rest of us whether it's the Indian or Deccan or Purple Monster variety doesn't really matter. "Mujahideen" is sufficient to make the Muslim connection, which is all we need to know. It continues to amaze me that even this simplest of facts, which takes only a visit to a dictionary to learn about, seems to elude the MSM.
There is ALWAYS a Saudi connection to the terrorists. The places that mujahidin murderers revere and worship are in that wild desert country.
The criminals bow their heads daily towards the "holy places" of Saudi Arabia, the most cherished symbols of the "religion of peace".
By their actions the assassins promote the Saudi religion.
As Moorthy Muthuswamy said in his August interview with FrontpageMag: "The primary powers behind the jihad build-up in India, and the resulting terror and mayhem created there are Pakistan and Saudi Arabia."
The whole interview "India Unravelling" is here:
http://frontpagemag.com/articles/Read.aspx?GUID=5C2AF0F9-9FDD-4595-89BA-308CC5C8549A
He posted here earlier today:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/023670.php#comments
The Saudi connection to India goes back over a century to the Wahhabists. The Turks did their best to crush Wahhabism but it wouldn't die. Not only did it maintain a stronghold in Riyadh (which would come back to haunt the world, thanks to FDR), one of its teachers named Seyyid Ahmed, a freebooter of Bareily in India and said to be a descendant of the prophet, propagated Wahhabi doctrines in India and, proclaiming himself to be the true caliph, or mahdi, commenced a religious war in the beginning of the 19th century. To this day, the Wahhabis exercise a powerful influence in Northern India.
The spelling of names and places in the above paragraph might be obsolete but the info about Seyyid Ahmed came from a book written in 1911. How much has really changed since then? Thanks to Wahhab, weren't the Indian Muslims already among the most fundamentalist of the lot? Why would any connection with the Wahhabist motherland be remarkable? It's par for the course.
(It took FOUR logins for me to get on. What's happening here?)
Saudi's are always financing muslim terrorists.
BTW: this typepad thing SUCKS. It took me 6 times to log in and post
typepad seems to have stopped playing up, on me at least.
So far today all I've had to do is hit 'post' and away she goes.
All terrorism pretty much goes back to Saudi Arabia, most of it by way of Pakistan. The Saudis planned this years ago when they started opening up all the madrassas in Pakistan and making sure that every instructor would sexually abuse all the boys, just to make doubly sure that they all turn into terrorists. The Saudis also like Paki and Indian Muslims because the Deobands are their brothers in fundamentalist extremism.
in 2006 Obama campaigned in Kenya with his cousin Odenga to attempt to safe-haven terriorists and turn kenya into a SHARIA LAW STATE. when they lost the election a pre-planned bloodbath took place. there was a pre-planned bloodbath scheduled for USA as well announced 2 days before election which everyone probably missed.
Now the latest Pakistan is now under SHARIA LAW. go to debbieshclussel.com and see for yourselves about the LA SUN video and "see whom" the terriorists were.
We should have tied our exit to political progress and voted REPUBLICAN.
I've been a big fan of Tolkien ever since reading LotR for the first time some 30 years ago.
When it first appeared in the 50's many commentators felt that if symbolized the West's struggle with Nazi Germany, with Mordor being Germany and Sauron being Hitler. In this reading Saruman represented the defeatists and appeasers who felt that Europe's only hope was to reach some accomodation with Hitler.
When I read it, I preferred to think that Mordor symbolized Bolshevik Russia, and Sauron represented Stalin. In that intrepretation, Saruman represents Hitler, a Westerner who betrayed the West by building his own totatlitarian state in imitation of the Bolsheviks.
Now we have the suggestion that Mordor symbolizes the Islamic world.
Tolkien himself denied that there was any symbolism intended in the books.
Incidentally I liked the movies, but I liked the books even more. I think that director Jackson should have made it in six parts -- one for each book, rather then in three -- one for each volume. Too much was left out.
Thank you "Dumbledoresarmy"; I now have the book and shall read it as soon as I am able to.
Thank you "Dumbledoresarmy"; I now have the book and shall read it as soon as I am able to.
ebonystone
I would argue that there is, so to speak, *analogy* between Tolkien's fictional middle-earth resisting Sauron, or for that matter, Rowlings' magical alternate England fighting Voldemort, and the real-life struggle against the jihad.
I agree that Tolkien wasn't writing allegory - you can't read off any clear one-on-one correspondences - but I think his imagination *was* shaped, or fed, or inspired, by what he knew of history. The most obvious example is this: when I first encountered the story of Jan Sobieski and his Polish Hussars' spectacular ride to the rescue of Vienna in 1683, I thought 'oh my god, *now* I know what inspired the Ride of the Rohirrim'. Likewise it was only after reading an account of the Siege of Malta in 1565 that I thought - where have I read this sort of thing before...the Siege of Gondor!
He used all kinds of things - his own experience of trench warfare, for example, has fed into, or been transmuted into, the description of the creation of the Dead Marshes - but I think the parallel or analogy between the fictional epic of Middle Earth, and Christendom's resistance to Jihad, does 'fit' somewhat better than any attempt to relate Tolkien's story to either the Second World War or the Cold War.
Given the equipment the Jihadis had - satellite phones, night vision goggles, dingies, a ship, it's pretty obvious that while the 'man'-power for this came from both Pakistan and Indian Mohammedans, the funding for this came from Saudis, and maybe even other GCC countries.
With $364 billion in the hands of these countries in the last year, they have enough cash to fund jihad everywhere in the world, not just in India. And in this world economy, jihad is probably the only profession that pays well.