The atrocities in Mumbai have left reporters and commentators floundering for explanations. Why India? Was this a local terrorist group or al Qaeda? Why single out Americans and Brits if they also targeted Indians in the railway station? Why attack some obscure Jewish organisation? And so on. They are floundering because they still just don’t get it. The atrocities demonstrated with crystal clarity what the Islamist war is all about – and the western commentariat didn’t understand because it simply refuses to acknowledge, even now, what that war actually is. It does not arise from particular grievances. It is not rooted in ‘despair’ over Palestine. It is not a reaction to the war in Iraq. It is a war waged in the name of Islam against America, Britain, Hindus, Jews and all who refuse to submit to Islamic conquest. The Mumbai atrocities told us very clearly a number of things.
- They went to some lengths in addition to single out a centre for observant Jews. Rabbi Holtzberg and his wife Rivka were murdered not because of Palestine but simply because they were Jews. That is because hatred of Jews as Jews is fundamental to the Islamists’ hatred of the west – and of Israel.
- The Islamists showed a degree of organisation and co-ordination which are more akin to commando raids by an army than acts of terrorism.
- They have the capacity not merely to commit mass murder but to cause mortal damage to a country’s economy.
- If they can do this in Mumbai, they can do it in London or other British cities; the infrastructure of Islamist terror is more extensively developed in Britain, and the authorities more paralysed in the face of what they have allowed to grow in their midst, than anywhere else in the west.
I guess the devotees of the perverse (literally and figuratively) cult of Muhammad didn't get the new, post Nov 4th memo...
The Jihadis don't seem to interested in America's Change.
"The Islamists showed a degree of organisation and co-ordination which are more akin to commando raids by an army than acts of terrorism."
THIS IS UTTER BULLSHIT.
THEY USED THE SAME TECHNIQUES HERE AS IN IRAQ AND ELSEWHERE.
"A unique attack
The Mumbai attack differs from previous terror attacks launched by Islamic terror groups. Al Qaeda and other terror groups have not used multiple assault teams to attack multiple targets simultaneously in a major city outside of a war zone.
Al Qaeda and allied groups have conducted complex military assaults on military and non-military targets in countries such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Somalia, Algeria, and Pakistan. But these are countries that are actively in a state of war or emerging from a recent war, where resources and established fighting units already exist."
ROGGIO MAKES ONE HUGE ERROR:
HE IS USING A WESTERN DEFINITON OF WAR ZONE.
THE ENEMY DEFINES ALL ARES NOT UNDER CONTROL OF MUSLIMS AS DAR EL HARB - SO MUMBAI AND LONDON AND MADRID ARE ALL "FAIR TARGETS" FOR THIS ENEMY, AS SUBJECT TO ANY TECHNIQUE THEY CHOOSE AS FALLUJAH AND RAMADI AND SOUTHERN THAILAND AND THE MOROS.
THEREFORE; THIS ATTACK IS NOT UNIQUE AND REPRESENTS NO CHANGE, NO NEW PLATEUA FOR THE ENEMY.
THAT'S JUST A FACT.
IF YOU DON'T LIKE THAT ...; WELL THAT'S TOO BAD.
REPEAT: EVEN ROGGIO ADMITS THEY USED THESE VERY SAME TECHNIQUES IN MANY PLACES BEFORE, ONLY HE ARGUES THEY ARE ALL "WAR ZONES".
MUMBAI AND ATOCHA AND LONDON AND NYC AND DC ARE ALL IN DAR EL HARB - THAT MEANS WAR ZONE TO THE ENEMY.
Post a Comment