This blog contains material I wrote and posted on between the years 2005 and 2011 only. It does not contain any new material. For newer writing, please check my main blog (Bill the Butcher).

Saturday, 13 October 2012

The Bombay Attack Series: Part 4

This was the concluding part of the "running commentary" section:

A day after the Bombay attacks finally ended, let me go ahead and pose some questions that occur to me (in no particular sequence):

1.    If one reads the international media coverage of this episode, one would get the distinct impression that this was an attack on Westerners, specifically Zionazis (“Israelis”) – and that any Indian victims of the terrorists were basically collateral damage. Well, people, wake up. Of the – officially, this far – 195 or 183 or “more than 300” killed, fewer than a score were foreigners. The vast majority were Indians. Get that? It was an attack on India, not on Europeans, “Europeans” (Zionazis) or Americans.

2.    If I read one more account of how Rabbi Whoosit with the “big heart’ (what, cardiomegaly? Who leaked the medical records?) and his Rivka were “tragically killed” at the Jewish Center (sic) at Nariman House, I’ll puke. Get me straight on this: Nariman House was, without a doubt, the least important target attacked. The total official death toll there was eight: two terrorists, one soldier, and five “hostages” (I’m putting the word in quotes because there is a great difference between hostages and people who just happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, and get trapped in the crossfire). But listening to the international media, you’d think Rabbi Whoosit was the primary target of the attacks. I don’t want to sound like a Holocaust denier, but I see a clear bit of “professional victim” here.

3.    I don’t know why the hell the media is still focussing almost exclusively on the Taj Palace Hotel, a hangout of capitalist fatcats whom I’d have been happy enough to see swinging by their intestines. Ordinary human beings in large numbers died in Victoria Terminus (the floor of the railway station was awash in blood) but the media insists to this moment on focussing on the Taj Palace casualties to the exclusion of everything else except  of course Rabbi Whoosit. Maybe because ordinary Indian lives have zero value?

4.    Mr Rotten Tatter – excuse me, Ratan Tata, the owner of the Taj Palace Hotel – (the same Ratan Tata behind the Tatter No-no, excuse me, Tata Nano) was pretty quick off the mark in condemning the attack on his property. I wonder where his conscience was when farmland was taken from farmers at gunpoint to house his car factory just a few months ago? Where was his conscience when he praised and embraced the murderous Hindunazi politician Narendra Modi?

5.    Mr Vomit-up Bachpan, excuse me, the Bollywood actor Amitabh Bachchan – wanted to get into the act and so said he slept with a loaded revolver under his pillow. I don’t know which film he got that clichéd idea from, but I doubt his revolver would have been much use against an AK series rifle if he’d been attacked. I  also doubt that if he’d really been worried, he’d have slept. He’d have sat up with the gun in his hand, instead.

6.    I realise I’ve said this before, but just how the hell does a squad of just ten jihadis capture, for all practical purposes, a city of 15 million? I wouldn’t even begin to believe it. The whole basis of this belief seems to be that the “one” captured terrorist said there were ten terrorists, all Pakistanis, and that while “one” was captured, nine dead terrorists were found.

i.    I’ve said this before, too, but it bears repeating; there is no reason to believe a terrorist just because he says something. He may be lying deliberately in order to derail your investigations.

ii.    I said “one” captured terrorist advisedly. As I’ve said repeatedly, the news channels flashed news of up to eight terrorists being captured, some of them being British citizens of Pakistani origin. What happened to the rest? Why did no one follow up on the possible involvement of British citizens? Because it’s way easier to blame Pakistan?

iii.    This “one” terrorist has given out three different names. Which is his? Or are there three different terrorists in captivity? Then what happened to the others?

iv.    This “one” terrorist is supposed to speak fluent English and Hindi (the latter not being a language most Pakistanis speak).But the TV channel India TV conducted two telephone interviews with terrorists during the siege, and they spoke in Punjabi with a “Pakistani accent”, an accent so marked our “Intelligence Agencies” realised they hailed from, specifically, Faridkot in Pakistan. Why not in English? No one can distinguish between North Indian and Pakistani accents in English anyway.

v.    This “one” terrorist is supposed to have confessed to having booked a room at the Taj Palace Hotel days ago and stockpiling explosives and weapons in that room. So what were the hotel staff doing, let alone the intelligence agencies? Were they all blind?

vi.    This captured terrorist says he booked the room and stocked explosives. He also says he and his mates took a Vietnam bound ship out of Karachi, Pakistan, got off it, hijacked an Indian trawler (which has been captured since then), murdered the crew, and sailed in on rubber dinghies. What the hell for? He had already got the weapons there, right? Why go back to Karachi and come in with such a risky strategy?

7.    The Indian government claims that the terrorists wanted to blow up the Taj Palace Hotel. If they did, why the hell didn’t they just use a truck bomb and have done with it? It also claims that the terrorists wanted to kill “5000 people’. The basis for this claim seems to be the idea that the terrorists had enough weaponry to kill 5000. So the fact that they did not blow the Taj Palace off the map and killed only a couple of hundred makes the attack a “victory” for the government.

8.    According to the Deputy Chief Minister of Maharashtra, RR Patil, such “minor incidents” affect any large city. I guess if it were his family that were targeted it wouldn’t be all that minor.

9.    The highly incompetent Home Minister, Shivraj Patil (no relative of RR Patil) has been dismissed, and is set to be replaced by the current Finance  Minister, P Chidambaram (you know, the guy who’s made sure our economy is in such wonderful shape). Going by Mr Chidambaram’s performance in the Finance Ministry, I can just see him in action when the next terror strike occurs. When the terrorists have pointed their guns at the hostages, Mr Chidambaram is bound to say “Wait, don’t worry, the fundamentals of the situation are sound; after all, they haven’t pulled the trigger yet!”

10.    I’m frankly shocked at the outburst of anti-Muslim hysteria on Indian websites. I know a hell of a lot of Hindus are rabid bigots, but one would have thought they would have the elementary sense to realise that Muslims were also among the victims (in fact, even the first of all the victims, a taxi driver blown up by a grenade, was a Muslim, and up to 30% of the victims of the terrorists at the Victoria Terminus were Muslims, including six members of a single family from Bihar).

11.    The Hindunazi echo chamber seems to have taken this opportunity to argue that the fact that these attackers were (probably) jihadis proves that there is no such thing as Hindu terror and that the Hindu terrorists in custody were all framed. The logic of  this claim is beyond me.

12.    A whole passel of morons are posting lists of "recent terror attacks” online. Almost all these lists seem to miss out the Assam bombs  that left nearly a hundred dead just a month ago. But as I said, we North Easterners aren’t considered Indians – or humans, if it comes to that.

OK, I promise this is the last I’m going to speak on this episode until and unless I can find something that I can guarantee is a fact. Which means I shall not discuss this any more.*

Until the next attack. 

*I did not keep this promise.

No comments:

Post a Comment