These outrages do not cease. Archangel Michael, by the Lord's Power, defend your people, Israel! May the killers and their chiefs, and the vile, hateful creed that they profess, be wiped clean off the face of the Earth.

Posted by: John C at November 27, 2008 4:23 AM

These outrages do not cease. Archangel Michael, by the Lord's Power, defend your people, Israel! May the killers and their chiefs, and the vile, hateful creed that they profess, be wiped clean off the face of the Earth.

Posted by: John C at November 27, 2008 4:23 AM

Unknown my ass. Why do we think about Muslim terrorists the way we think about corporate brands? They don't have to register with some agency.

The whatever it is Mujahedeen is the same whatever it is Mujahedeen as murder and rape everywhere else. They didn't exist yesterday, they won't exist tomorrow. Looking for a label is bloody pointless.

They are violent, essentialist Muslims. They are following their prophet in the clearest possible way, striking necks and fingertips, sowing terror. Why the hell is it so important to name them as some actual, distinguishable, consistent group, when they flow and reform as easily as sewage down a pipeline?

Posted by: Marwan'sDaughter at November 27, 2008 4:32 AM

I wouldn't be suprised if the usual Middle-East based "talking heads" weren't already concocting a way to blame the rabbi for the carnage their co-religionists have created, since Jews are always to blame for everything in their sick, bestial and lazy minds.

Posted by: Proud_Kafir7908 at November 27, 2008 5:19 AM

Here are the links for the Jerusalem Post accounts of the same events. There are a few extra details.

First, the attack on the Chabad House. Thanks be to the Holy One that the rabbi's little son has been freed, at least.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1227702336066&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

And here is the broader Jerusalem Post account of the Muslim jihad raid on Mumbai:

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1227702333602&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Note well that one man among the hotel guests was using his wits: "he managed to slip away as the patrons were forced to walk up stairs".

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 27, 2008 6:04 AM

If this terrorist group is indeed new, it should be feared for the lives of that Rabbi and his wife - Hopefully, the Indian government will get to them before something horrible takes place.

Posted by: swilliams at November 27, 2008 6:11 AM

As painful to watch as the events is the lengths to which journalists go to avoid blaming the ideology that prompts the terrorists to commit their murderous actions.

As long as the ideology is spared, it will continue to breed new terrorists. This is an ideological war. The ideology is like the Hydra, it grows new heads when and where they are cut.

Muslims are expendable, Islam has thousands of them in store to continue its reign of terror.

Posted by: rocky at November 27, 2008 6:44 AM

As painful to watch as the events is the lengths to which journalists go to avoid blaming the ideology that prompts the terrorists to commit their murderous actions.

As long as the ideology is spared, it will continue to breed new terrorists. This is an ideological war. The ideology is like the Hydra, it grows new heads when and where they are cut.

Muslims are expendable, Islam has thousands of them in store to continue its reign of terror.

Posted by: rocky at November 27, 2008 6:45 AM

Toward the end of the first 'Jerusalem Post' link that I posted, you will see a desperate request for prayer. All Jews and Christians here present, should pick up the book of Psalms.

Pray for the safety and deliverance of all hostages, for courage and wisdom and divine guidance and protection for the Indian armed forces and police, and for the healing of all who have been wounded by the jihadists. Pray for the comfort of the bereaved.

Pray that all jihadists involved in planning, financing or carrying out this evil attack upon India and its non-Muslim people and their guests, may be swiftly captured and punished.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 27, 2008 7:04 AM

Indian government has failed to protect the citizens of India as well foreign tourists. It will continue to get worse and Islamic Jihadis will continue to attack that is the reality because Islam will not take the blame.

I pray that these hostages are freed soon without any harm, and these Mohammedans killed.

Posted by: savsiv at November 27, 2008 8:17 AM

A great deal of attention has been given to the Muslim terrorists attempting to separate out, and then kill or seize, the British and Americans. But of course there was one other category of human also at risk -- the Israelis, and other Jews, whatever their nationality. There are the Israeli backpackers at the Leopold, and now it turns out, there was even an attack on the Lubavitchers:

"MUMBAI, India - Teams of gunmen stormed luxury hotels, a popular restaurant, hospitals and a crowded train station in coordinated attacks across India's financial capital Wednesday night, killing at least 101 people and taking Westerners hostage, police said.

Media reports said that gunmen also seized the Mumbai headquarters of the ultra-orthodox Jewish outreach group Chabad Lubavitch and that shots had been heard coming from the building.

Representatives of the New York-based group referred questions to their Web site, which said the Israeli consulate had earlier been in touch with the rabbi who lived in the house, "but the line was cut in middle of the conversation. No further contact has since been established."

A group of suspected Muslim militants claimed responsibility for the attacks. "

But as I noted above, it wasn't quite as bad as the seizure of that Air France plane by Palestinian Arabs who had it land it Entebbe, where they then separated out the Jews -- whatever their citizenship -- from all the other passengers, intending for the former a special fate. No, this time at least, because the Lesser Jihad against Israel is not the only one going, because the OPEC trillions and the millions of Muslims allowed to settle deep within Western Europe, has permitted Arabs and Muslims to conduct a much larger, world-girdling Jihad, they also wanted, those Muslim terrorists, to separate from all the others not only Jews, but now, because they have much bigger fish to fry than tiny Israel, and as a way to damage Infidel India's economy in several different ways, also the British, also the Americans.

Posted by: Hugh at November 27, 2008 8:21 AM

India will suffer from this because now it will lose out on tourists and foreign companies wanting to set up and do business in India. UMMAH countries have hardly or limited tourist business, while neighboring Bangladesh has almost nil and Pakistan has some but not as large as India. Both Bangladesh and Pakistan Islamic countries which says a lot and their economies are in shambles.

Type pad need to fix their glitches soon.

Posted by: savsiv at November 27, 2008 8:29 AM

From the AP:

"The gunmen were specifically targeting Britons and Americans..."

Is it just me or did AP "forget" to mention that they appear to be "specifically targeting" Jews, too?

More MSM negligence? Or worse?

Posted by: emet-veritas at November 27, 2008 8:36 AM

They dare not call it what it is, an act of war...

Other acts of war are in the works.

It is still jihad, but it is going beyond terrorism...'Beyond Terrorism', a good title for a book...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 27, 2008 8:45 AM

Hugh, they've never hidden their desire to fry bigger fish. Let's not forget Robert Dean Stethem, the navy diver singled out for being American, in 1985.

It's just happening with more frequency now, since they've learned they can get away with it.

Posted by: Vee at November 27, 2008 9:38 AM

You are right that Muslims, using terrorism as their instrument of Jihad, did not begin today, or yesterday, to target Americans and British, that is others aside from the long-obvious targets of Jihad (Hindus, especially in Kashmir, Israeli and other Jews).

But before the OPEC trillions, and before the Muslim millions foolishly allowed to settle in the nations that make up the Bilad al-kufr, the Lands of the Infidels, the world's Muslims, or those who have chosen to use violence as their instrument of Jihad, did not possess the confidence that they could conduct such an effort against the major world powers, but that is what is now happening. It is true that in the West itself, where Muslims still are such a tiny minority, the main instruments remain not combat (qitaal) or terrorism, which many Muslims justify as a perfectly legitimate, "equalizing" (because of Western military superiority) variant of the "qitaal" engaged in by the earliest Muslims, but rather such effective and relentless -- though "non-violent" methods -- as deployment of the Money Weapon, campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest.

Posted by: Hugh at November 27, 2008 9:53 AM

"[Muslims] did not possess the confidence that they could conduct such an effort against the major world powers, but that is what is now happening."

That makes it worth remembering one of Hugh's brilliant pieces on how things were when Western leaders didn't lack the confidence to confront such barbarians head-on:

http://jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/011325.php

Posted by: Proud_Kafir7908 at November 27, 2008 10:06 AM

Been following this on TV for quite a while. The nightmare is nearly over I think. No one in Mumbai feels safe.

The terrorist's accents are clearly Pakjabi and pathan. In fact they are supposed to have boarded a ship from Karachi to Mumbai.

C'mon Barak Obama, live up to your promises and bomb Pakistan to smithereens..

I'm a little disappointed to see so few comments here, esp as westerners were amongst the casualties too. The thread at Bharat Rakshak has over 1700 comments.

Posted by: infidel_hindu at November 27, 2008 10:14 AM

Maybe someone can help me understand this enigma.

India has been devastated by Muslim terror and violence; for years! Nevertheless, India's government is solidly on the side of the Palestinian jihadists. India votes against Israel's self defense in the United Nations. India was opposed to Israel's establishment. India voted against the 1947 United Nations partition plan. India is on the side of the Muslim jihadists who are murdering innocent Jewish women and children.

George W. Bush is on the side of the Palestinian jihadists. I wonder if Bush saw all those Palestinian Arabs celebrating Saddam Hussein's scud missile attacks on Israel during the Gulf War. I wonder if President Bush saw the videos of mass celebrations in the Palestinian Arab territories on 9/11.

Can anyone explain this dichotomy?

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 10:15 AM

Wild Jew: Can anyone explain this dichotomy?

Nope, it's beyond me.

I can't explain why Bush the filthy kufr Muslim killer, breaks bread with Mohammadans, kisses Mohammadans, and prays in their mosques, and they don't try and kill him.

That's a mind bender of a dichotomy in itself...

Posted by: duh_swami at November 27, 2008 10:25 AM

Wild Jew:

I too have no idea as well. However, recently since 1990 when the BJP party governed India there has been a growing ties with Israel and as a matter of fact Israel helped India during the Kargil war with Pakistan.

Israel does supply India with much needed military and other technologies to combat Islamic Jihad. I think some of these policies have to do with the appeasing attitude by the Congress party to appease the Muslim population of India.

Posted by: savsiv at November 27, 2008 10:37 AM

Again there will be attempt by liberal secularists to link this attack to domestic incidents like violence in Gujrat, and persecution of Muslims by anti terrorist squads etc. But the special care they took to capture Nariman house where Jewish families were residing shows that there agenda is more theological and global. Because most Indians are ignorant about Jews. Literacy is recent phenomenon in India and still more than one third population is illiterate (muslims even more so). Chances are there that an Indian would have never seen, read or heard about a jew at all (except those reading Koran or Hadiths ) and the Israeli tourists would not be distinguished from any firangee (white) tourists. Jews have never harmed any Indian Muslim. The only reasons they have to attack Jews are that they are directed theologically to do so.

Posted by: pagan at November 27, 2008 10:51 AM

I think some of these policies have to do with the appeasing attitude by the Congress party to appease the Muslim population of India.

Posted by: savsiv

Thanks. Appeasement. Maybe I am an idealist. I believe in doing what is right in politics; not what is expedient. Just now I have been reading about Abraham Lincoln and the Civil War.

Abolitionists urged Lincoln to issue an emancipation proclamation right at the commencement of hostilities.

For some political reasons, Lincoln refused and did not do this for several years, as the bloody war dragged on and on. I would have done this at the beginning of the rebellion. Same holds true for India and America. Both countries, in an effort to appease our Muslim enemies do so at the expense of an ally, Israel.

Former American slave, Frederick Douglass, writing about the treatment of slaves in the south asked, "Will not a righteous God visit for these things?"

I ask a similar question. "Will not a righteous God visit for these things?

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 10:51 AM

Again there will be attempt by liberal secularists to link this attack to domestic incidents like violence in Gujrat, and persecution of Muslims by anti terrorist squads etc. But the special care they took to capture Nariman house where Jewish families were residing shows that there agenda is more theological and global. Because most Indians are ignorant about Jews. Literacy is recent phenomenon in India and still more than one third population is illiterate (muslims even more so). Chances are there that an Indian would have never seen, read or heard about a jew at all (except those reading Koran or Hadiths ) and the Israeli tourists would not be distinguished from any firangee (white) tourists. Jews have never harmed any Indian Muslim. The only reasons they have to attack Jews are that they are directed theologically to do so.

Posted by: pagan at November 27, 2008 10:57 AM

>>India was opposed to Israel's establishment. India voted against the 1947 United Nations partition plan.

Are u really sure about this? India wasn't even independant till 1947.

In fact Indo-Israel ties are very strong in the recent decades. Seculars and commies may be crying tears for 'palestinians' but they do so all over the world.

Posted by: infidel_hindu at November 27, 2008 11:07 AM

Please do not get me wrong. I am not a fan of the United Nations. To me, the UN has become a criminal organization. According to my historian, India voted against partition along with Cuba and Greece. All six then independent Arab states voted against the November 29, 1947 plan.

Israel accepted partition only reluctantly, as they accepted most every other bad plan put forward.

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 11:23 AM

"Maybe someone can help me understand this enigma.

India has been devastated by Muslim terror and violence; for years"

Years? Try about a thousand frickin years!

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/history/holocaust.asp

Posted by: DenverRodeo at November 27, 2008 11:23 AM

Sufficient for the Jew is the Flaming Fire!
-- the supposed god Allah in Koran 4:55

This kind of crazy hate-talk from the rabid mouth of Allah is what fires these Moslems into activism.

Posted by: 33:21 at November 27, 2008 11:24 AM

Right. Why do you suppose DenverRodeo, India would then ally with Islamic jihadists who are murdering innocent Jews in Israel? I believe Christianity commands us to love our enemies. Does Hinduism teach this do you think?

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 11:27 AM

.

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at November 27, 2008 11:29 AM

Aren't the Indian moslems supposed to be in Pak?

Posted by: Ummah Gummah at November 27, 2008 11:31 AM

Almost a day has passed since the news broke, and CNN STILL cannot bring itself to use the words Islam or Muslim or jihad in its reports about Mumbai. They bob and weave, waltz and dance around the subject, speculating endlessly about who the attackers were, what their motives might be. The consensus now appears to be that it's all for publicity, to "get the world's attention." For what isn't mentioned, but the consensus view is delivered with great seriousness.

Sickening.

Posted by: Eastview at November 27, 2008 11:46 AM

I wouldn't be suprised if the usual Middle-East based "talking heads" weren't already concocting a way to blame the rabbi for the carnage their co-religionists have created, since Jews are always to blame for everything in their sick, bestial and lazy minds.

Speaking of sick, lazy minds, the wretched Deepak Chopra is on TV blaming the whole mess on American and British foreign policy. He sez that the "wars" in Iraq and Afghanistan have driven millions of good, kind, thoughtful, and peaceful Moslem Moderates to extremism, and India thus has fallen victim to this, what with a quarter billion Moslems in India and all.

* 2:61 * 2:64 * 2:96 * 4:41 * 4:47 * 4:55 * 4:160 * 5:13 * 5:41 * 5:59 * 17:7 * 59:2 * 88:1 *

Deepak has written 40 books. It must be that profound confusion makes a person a windbag with itchy fingers.

At least Deepak holds his wagging tongue during his hallucinations of Moderate Moslems, and doesn't state the what he really feels: The sneaky Jews took over America's foreign policy and has manipulated this once great nation into a devious plot to hound our poor beleaguered Moslem friends.

As the supposed god Allah (another well respected and very famous conspiracy theorist) once said:

But you Jews went back on your word and were lost losers. So become apes, despised and hated. We made an example out of you.
-- Koran 2:64

Just who is this we about which the great Allah speaks? Did he have help in his work? The "holy prophet" Mohammed, maybe?

Posted by: 33:21 at November 27, 2008 11:54 AM

The latest news from Nariman house is that all the hostages had been freed, and that commandos were simply waiting for the operations at the other 2 hotels to complete before going in.

Wild Jew

Don't conflate India and Hinduism. India's political history can be split into 2 chapters - one from independence (1947) to 1991 (the rise of the Hindu BJP to a national party), and then from 1991 to now.

India's policies from independence onwards were determined not by Hindu nationalists, but by 2 Islamophilic leaders - Gandhi and Nehru. As you are probably aware, Gandhi supported Islamic movements like the Khilafat movement of 1919 aiming to restore the Turkish sultan to Caliph - something even the Turks were sick of, while Nehru used to pride himself of thinking of himself as a 'cultural Muslim' (whatever that meant). End result was that they were willing to do anything to make Mohammedans in India like them (not = liking Hindus), and to do that, they were willing to do anything to make Mohammedans abroad like India, so that Indian Mohammedans would see India as pro-Mohammedan if Mohammedans abroad was pro-India, and would prefer them to Pakistan. Opposition to Israel and/or Jews was a small price to pay for this, in their illustrious opinion. Couple this with Nehru's pet affinity for non-Alignment (code word for being pro-Soviet without actually stating it), and Leftist support for the Arabs against Israel was something that was easy for Nehru i.e. India to rally behind. (For this part of the analysis, don't think that Hindus had any opinion on the matter - pro or anti Israel). In fact, for a while, India even wanted to be a member of the OIC, but that was successfully blocked by Pakistan (One thing I praise Pakistan for pulling off).

In 1991, after the death of Rajiv Gandhi, when the Congress was in power for the first time without a Nehru/Gandhi at the top, it was also when the Babri Masjid (Mosque of Babur) in the Hindu holy city of Ayodhya was demolished, after some 5 years of bickering over its status (for Hindus, it was the birthplace of Lord Rama, the 7th incarnation of Vishnu, and the location of a temple to mark that hallowed ground). When this happened, the OIC was unanimous about condemning India, and that was when India started to look objectively at whether this foreign policy of opposing Israel did it any favors (and also stopped seeking membership in the OIC). As a result, India opened diplomatic relations with Israel, and while at the UN, it continued to often vote with Arab countries (wrong, but in no way different from the EU and at times even the US State Department), it also started a new trade and defense relationship with Israel that continues to this day. Basically, India has this dichotomic relationship with Israel: in foreign affairs, it's either neutral, or passively opposed to Israel, while in defense relations, Israel replaced Russia and France as India's closest ally. (This is something Israel ought to be the one to end: either be friends both ways or neither.) Another thing worth pointing out is that until earlier this year, the Communists were allies of this Indian government, and would put pressure on it to be more anti-Israel - a pressure that disappeared once the Left withdrew support to the government over the nuclear deal between India and the US.

None of the above should be confused with relationships between Hinduism and Judaism. Both religions are pretty old, and grew up in places where they hardly came into contact with each other for several millenia. In fact, India is the only place in the world where there has never been any Judeophobia (something that the Israelis have themselves recognized), since neither Judaism nor Hinduism attempts to force itself on non-believers. Among Hindutva groups, while there has been a strong anti-Islamic fervor throughout their existence, and even anti-Christian undertones due to missionary activity, there has never been any anti-Jewish sentiments by such groups because of this relationship.

Hope this makes it clearer.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 27, 2008 1:16 PM

Infidel Pride, it seems that India has consistently stood with the Palestinian Muslim cause against the Jews in Israel. I remember several years back, I called my American Indian neighbor asking him why India is so hostile toward Israel.

India and Israel should be natural allies. This is where you and I differ considerably. I hold that a nation is collectively responsible for its leaders. That held true in Nazi Germany. It holds true for largely Christian America and it holds true for largely Hindu / Buddhist India.

The people suffer for the crimes of our leaders. We are witnessing this, I believe, with George W. Bush whom I believe is a traitor and yet, conservatives, conservative activists and leaders, Republican party leaders have stood by Bush as Bush warred against the people of Israel and the land of Israel. Clearly Bush is on the side of our enemies and America will suffer for it.

I believe the same is true in India. Indians cannot plead innocence as their government stands with jihadist killers. Neither can American.

In this, you and I disagree. The people are collectively responsible for the criminal acts of their governments. Only those who resist and defy criminal leaders are innocent. Nevertheless, often the innocent suffer along with the guilty. Only in God's eyes are you innocent if you resist and defy evil leaders.

Have you?

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 1:39 PM

Wild Jew

I agree with you insofaras the Indian people should have taken a stand against the Congress and Islam right from independence, and not bought into the rhetoric of winning international Mohammedan support against Pakistan - something that wasn't going to happen and ultimately didn't. So yes, the Indian people do deserve appropriate opprobrium for turning a blind eye to India's policy on Israel, and letting the Nehru/Gandhis do whatever they felt like.

However, the way I read your post, it seems that you are holding Hindus responsible for this. But that would be like me blaming Jews for returning Sinai to Egypt, being willing to make unbelievable concessions to the PA under Arafat when Ehud Barak ran things, and now, under Olmert, considering returning the Golan Heights to Syria, and then asking whether all this is demanded/sanctioned under Judaism. After all, all these leaders are being elected by none other than Jews, so would it be Judeophobic of me if I were to accuse Jews of doing something so self-destructive? I don't think so, since none of these activities are in the interests of either Jews nor Judaism, just as India's support to the Palis was neither in the interests of Hindus nor in the traditions of Hinduism.

See my point?

Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 27, 2008 2:16 PM

Oh, and I do agree with you that India and Israel should be natural allies, just as Hindus and Jews are. It's only of late that that seems to be the policy as far as India goes.

However, if the next Indian government is a BJP led one, I think it'll be even more pro-Israel, while if it is a Congress led one, it'll be neutral. A government belonging to the Leftist backed 'Third Front' however would be a throwback to the bad old days: good news, however, is that such a government is unlikely to be stable and last more than a year in office.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 27, 2008 2:19 PM

You wrote: "However, the way I read your post, it seems that you are holding Hindus responsible for this. But that would be like me blaming Jews for returning Sinai to Egypt, being willing to make unbelievable concessions to the PA under Arafat when Ehud Barak ran things, and now, under Olmert, considering returning the Golan Heights to Syria, and then asking whether all this is demanded/sanctioned under Judaism. After all, all these leaders are being elected by none other than Jews, so would it be Judeophobic of me if I were to accuse Jews of doing something so self-destructive? I don't think so, since none of these activities are in the interests of either Jews nor Judaism, just as India's support to the Palis was neither in the interests of Hindus nor in the traditions of Hinduism.

See my point?

Posted by: Infidel Pride

You make a good point. Absolutely, you should blame the Jews -- at least those who support these evil actions or who continually vote for these traitorous Jewish leaders or Jews who do not condemn these traitorous leaders. That is my point. Of course you should blame the Jews. I blame the Jews. Why shouldn't I? The Jews in Israel gave this evil Olmert the mandate to govern. This a wicked, corrupt man? Why shouldn't I blame the Jews in Israel for this? You are right, this is not sanctioned by Judaism, which makes them all the more guilty.

It's the same thing here in America. If you claim to be a Christian believer like Bush claims, if you support all this evil Bush has done in the name of his faith and his god, why shouldn't I blame you? Why shouldn't I hold Christian America guilty for Bush's crimes? Where is the Christian believer that will condemn George W. Bush for his crimes. I've not heard him call in to Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity. Where is he?

He cannot be found. He is no where to be found. He's stuffing his face today praying to Allah to bless America along with President George W. Bush and President elect Barack HUSSEIN Obama.

Is there a God in heaven who will judge this nation infidel pride?

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 2:42 PM

Wild Jew

I'd blame the Israelis in the case I put together: the fact that they are Jews is only incidental to their decision, and not centrally driving it. If those who voted Sharon and Olmert cited the Torah and Talmud as their justification and claimed that they were being more Jewish by their decision, then I'd blame the Jews. Not otherwise.

Same with Hindus. If people came up with citations from the Upanishads, or Manu's Smritis as to how we should behave with Mohammedans and point to that as the justification for pandering and appeasement, then Hinduism too would be guilty, and I'd blame Hindus. However, since religion had nothing to do with the support that Nehru and Gandhis got for decades, I blame the Indians who supported them all those years. True, the bulk of them were Hindu, but that support came despite their being Hindu, not because of it.

I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at November 27, 2008 2:52 PM

OK.

Posted by: Wild Jew at November 27, 2008 2:59 PM

filthy muslim terrorists

Posted by: rammer at November 27, 2008 8:57 PM

Israel is sending a rescue team (read: elite commando's) to India to assist the Indian special forces in freeing the Jewish family. I hope they are succesfull in freeing the family and kicking some muslim terrorist ass

Posted by: rammer at November 27, 2008 9:00 PM

Infidel Pride, Wild Jew

here's an article hot off the press, from Jerusalem Post, this morning (Aussie time), that you may both find of interest, if you have not already read it.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1227702353056&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

I'll copy it as well as providing the link, since over time links do sometimes break, as I have found in my explorations of the archives.
Jerusalem Post
Nov 27, 2008 23:25

Background: Islamic terrorism helped bring Israel, India together {should be: India, Israel unite to resist the global Jihad - dda}

By HERB KEINON

'The Islamic extremist terrorism behind the carnage in Mumbai has, ironically, been one of the engines behind Indo-Israeli ties, which have increased at a dizzying pace since the countries established diplomatic ties in 1992.

'Efraim Inbar, the director of Bar-Ilan University's BESA Center for Strategic Studies, said Thursday that India, like Israel, "sees the same source of terrorism: radical Islam."

'Combating that terrorism has been one of the anchors of the relationship, as manifest in intense defense, intelligence and counter-terrorist cooperation at the highest levels, as well as an annual counter-terror dialogue.

'Nevertheless, Indian diplomats traditionally downplay the role of anti-terrorism in bringing the two countries closer together.

'Highly dependent on Arab oil and with a Muslim minority of an estimated 150 million out of the country's more than 1 billion people, Indian officials are traditionally reticent about emphasizing anything other than the country's economic and cultural ties with Israel.

'Inbar's center holds an annual event with the New Delhi-based Institute for Defense Studies and Analyses, and he says that while some in India argue that Israel's terrorism problem is different because it stems from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, most of the Indian defense establishment understands that the roots of both countries' terrorism problems are found in radical Islam {hmm: I'd have said 'classical Islam' - dda}.

'In a paper called "The Indian-Israeli Entente" published in 2004, Inbar wrote that as early as February, 1992, at the very beginning of formal ties between the two countries, India's then-defense minister acknowledged the existence of Indo-Israeli cooperation on counter-terrorism.{tr: on resistance to the Jihad - dda}.

'This cooperation, which has since continued and crossed party lines with changes of governments in both India and Israel, has involved the exchange of information on terrorist groups, their finances, recruitment patterns, training and operations, as well as comparisons of national doctrines and operational experience.

'Likewise, Inbar wrote, "Israel and India learn from each other on border security. Facing the challenge of Muslim fundamentalist terrorism springing from camps inside Pakistan, the Indian military aims at developing the ability to quickly deploy troops inside enemy lines for specific missions."

'It is this Indian interest in closing its border that has led to large-scale arms deals with India, making Israel its second-largest arms supplier, after Russia.

"Mutual fear of radical Islam, both at home and in their immediate neighborhoods, has cemented Indo-Israeli ties," according to Inbar.

'While there was some concern in Jerusalem that Israel's strategic ties with India would decline in 2004 following the Congress Party's defeat of the Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, Inbar maintains that "business has continued as usual."

'Nevertheless, he said, there has been a marked decrease in the public nature of the ties, something evidenced by a decline in mutual high-profile visits, which reached a peak in 2003 with the first-ever visit by an Israeli prime minister, Ariel Sharon."

END ARTICLE

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 27, 2008 10:13 PM

A prayer for the Israeli and Indian commando teams, from the Krias Shema, as given by Chaim Potok in 'My Name is Asher Lev':

"In the name of the LORD, the G-d of Israel:

"may Michael be at my right hand, Gabriel at my left

"before me Uriel, behind me Raphael

"and above my head the divine Presence of G-d.

Amen and Amen."

And a story from a friend, who once had to confront a group of witches - the nasty kind, not at all like our friend 'solsticewitch' who posts here, these ladies were baaad news - setting up to do things in the graveyard of her parish church. She asked them to leave; they refused, sneeringly. At which she drew herself up to her full five feet nothing and heard herself saying in tones of command, 'Get. out. of. here. This. is. *my*. patch." at which they simply folded, and bolted. She remarked with satisfaction to her young son, who was with her, 'well, that got rid of *them*'.

'Oh it wasn't you they were afraid of,' said he. 'It was the pillar of cloud that was standing behind you'.

May that holy Presence be with all the commandos, Indian and Israeli, as they go up against the soldiers of darkness.

Posted by: dumbledoresarmy at November 27, 2008 10:20 PM

emet-veritas:

The MSM's silence on the selecting out of Jews IS worse than ignorance. The MSM's antisemitism has been open for years.

pagan:

Most Indian Jews are not at all white. For that matter, the Jewish community in India is of long-standing-- centuries old. A good friend of mine from Mumbai is very dark for example. Even a young girl I once worked with from a different part of India, although she could have passed for "white", was physically VERY Indian-looking [beautiful as well].

Posted by: MosheC at November 27, 2008 10:48 PM