In a bout of journalistic malpractice, The Washington Post ran a story
Tuesday declaring that officials had uncovered the true motivations of
the Mumbai terrorists: 400 years of persecution by the West and the
existence of Jews, especially in Israel. WaPo reported:
...Indian officials suspect that the
group allegedly behind the attack, Pakistan-based Lashkar-i-Taiba,
draws support from security and intelligence forces within that country
and is fueled by a growing list of grievances that stretch from the
17th century to the subcontinent's partition in 1947, which created the
independent nations of India and Pakistan.
The Post quotes one of the
murderers who telephoned officials as simply asking that the
destruction of mosques and "killings" be stopped - and that all
imprisoned terrorists be set free to kill again.
In addition to presenting the terrorists as a justifiably aggrieved
population, laboring under 400 years of "grievances," the Post notes
Western provocations against Mohammedans did not end 60 years ago in
the postwar world. "The grievances also include India's increasingly
warm ties with the United States and Israel, counterterrorism experts
say."
During the three-day siege that claimed the lives of more than 170 innocent people,
one of the terrorists, Imran Babar, called an Indian television station
to discuss his motives. After breaking into the city's only Jewish
center, the Chabad House, and killing
six people including its spiritual leader, Rabbi Gavriel Noach
Holtzberg and his wife, Rivka, Babar used the slain rabbi's cell phone
to call and complain about the Jewish state. Babar voiced outrage
that Israeli Major General Avi Mizrahi visited Kashmir in September to
discuss counterterrorism with Israel's democratic ally, India:
"You call their army staff to visit
Kashmir. Who are they to come to J and K?" Imran told the anchor,
referring to the disputed Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir. "This is a
matter between us and the Hindus, the Hindu government. Why does Israel
come here?"
Like Ariel Sharon's visit
to the Temple Mount, a pretext was fitted to an act of premeditated
violence. Nor is this the only incident of blatant provocation the Post
could find:
India and Israel have had a defense
alliance since 1992, when diplomatic relations between the countries
were established. India has become a major purchaser of Israeli
weapons, which has angered some of India's Muslims. The visit by the
Israeli general was kept secret for days, news reports said, for fear
of riots by Muslims in Kashmir, a predominantly Muslim area patrolled
by more than 300,000 mostly Hindu Indian troops.
Once again, Jewish merchants and interlopers are setting off waves of
Muslim violence around the globe by, being Jews. Inevitably, the very
existence of Israel as a state was introduced near the end of the
piece, as a summary of the Pakistani terrorists' case:
"Kashmir is a symbol, like Palestine,
of a sense of injustice. It is a rallying cry for a much larger anger
at India and the West," said [Bruce] Riedel, author of "The Search for
al Qaeda."
Thus, the real problem in India is the existence of Israel. And
Kashmir, Kosovo, Andalusian Spain, and any other province that strains
against the pressures of Islamic irredentism.
In fairness, the Post story does mention the force of Islamofascism, though, needless to say, not by that term. Lashkar-i-Taiba radicalism is mentioned, though it is given less space than passages that present the terrorists as victims:
"Lashkar has a very specific
pan-Islamic vision: the recovery of all Muslim lands once ruled by
Muslims, including India, Central Asia and Spain. And they've gone
after those countries that they believe were usurped from traditional
Muslim rulers," said Ashley J. Tellis, a senior associate at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace who has been tracking
Lashkar since 2001. "The goal is very apocalyptic and simple: attack
these enemies and the symbols of those enemies," he said.
It is this apocalyptic vision that has led Lashkar to kill hundreds of
Indians, at times dressed as Hindu holy men. Whatever the immediate
goals of (LIT), the ultimate goal of Islam is worldwide submission to Shari'a law. "No babe is born but [as a Muslim]," said
Mohammed. "It is his parents who make him a Jew, or a Christian, or a
polytheist." This universal compulsion explains all expressions of
Islamic jihad. The recounting of centuries of oppression, overlooking
centuries of their oppression of others, explains the depth of
self-pity and victimization in the Muslim mind. To place this
self-pitying narrative alongside Jewish arms merchants and Indian
self-defense is an abrogation of journalism at the highest level.