Thursday, November 27, 2008

Tragedy in Mumbai: Why was the Jewish Center [Chabad] Attacked?

I am watching CNN discuss the attacks. The various anchors, reporters on the scene, and commentators keep asking, "But why did they attack the Jewish center?"

They keep asking yet it seems so self-evident to me....

23 comments:

Roman Werpachowski said...

Why should it be self-evident at all? Does India have a history of anti-semitism comparable with European or Middle-Eastern?

I hope it's not an example of thinking "they were Muslims so they must have been anti-semites".

hockey hound said...

Guess what is the common denominator of all these terrorists and you shall come up with the only reason they attacked the Jewish Centre.

Deborah Lipstadt said...

Roman: Not that they were Muslims. No not at all. But that they were Muslim EXTREMISTS who have made a point of seeking out Jews because they have been convinced by their leaders that Jews are Muslims' mortal enemies.

Roman Werpachowski said...

Given that they were seeking out tourists with American and British passports, I think it was more political ("kill the Westerners") than racist ("kill the Jews").

Deborah Lipstadt said...

Roman: we will have to agree to disagree. As you should know from reading this blog, I am NOT one of those folks who sees an antsemite behind every action against Jews. [See my recent comment on events at Emory.]

However, from what I understand about Mumbai [I do not know the city so this is, I admit, impressionistic.] It is India's leading commercial city or at least one of the leading ones. It is filled with foreign sites or sites catering to foreigners. The Chabad House is not particularly large, not a major tourist site [even most Jews who visit Mumbai don't visit it, and not a place that is prominent on the Mumbai scene. Why would they go seek it out when there are other sites that much more clearly fit this bill?

That's all i have to say on the issue except to pray that the people there emerge alive and well. They have been held a long time and there has been no word from them....

hockey hound said...

"Why would they go seek it [the Chabad House] out when there are other sites that much more clearly fit this bill?"

I know why, Prof. Lipstadt. And I blame the Koran, wherein is found anti-Jewish passages briming over with anti-Jewish sentiment.

I am truly amazed by how Western politicians and academia continue to wilfully pass over this fact in their sophisticated attempts to explain why Muslim terrorist leaders continue to target Jews.

I mean no disrespect, Prof. Lipstadt (and I hope and pray for the safety of those Jewish hostages in India, may G-D protect them), but how can the world continue to believe that anti-Jewish hatred is not the intended efficacy of the Koran? How can the world continue to believe that anti-Jewish hatred is not a natural manifestation of the teachings of the religion of Islam? After all, Islam (and the Muslim adherent it initiates)arrogatively proclaims by means of denigration and a religiously taught enervation to have superceded the Jews as "the light unto the nations" and the Torah as proof of this "writ of mandamus."

And my statements here would have no weight--except for the fact that Islam's religious interpolations are derived directly from Judaism. We are always ready to rightly blame Christianity and Nazism for the anti-Jewish hated both ideologies precipitated in Europe, but the world is so hestitent to inculpate Islam for the seething anti-Jewish hatred it continues to effectuate in the world today.

This devastating, politically correct
habit brings to mind Michael Schueur's mournful observation that "history provides lessons to be learned and adapted, not opportunities for past experiences to be exactly duplicated." But this foolish duplication is still happening, and it's the reason Muslim terrorists are laughing at us: the West is still sleep-walking and has not realized that the religion of Islam is the only locus of terrorism, as Ajai Sahni writes, and it resides "wherever there are believers."

The only relevant question here should be, "Where did these terrorist "leaders" learn this anti-Jewish hatred?" As they say back here in the sticks, "They didn't get it out of the ground."

"The greater the truth, the greater the libel."

Happy Shabbos (in spite of all the bad news), Prof. Lipstadt.

Roman Werpachowski said...

I am amazed that such racism goes unanswered *on this blog*. I work with Muslim people on daily basis and none of them is "seething hatred" towards the Jews.

Oh, and by the way: there are Hindu terror cells in India as well. But initially, people like HH put the blame on the Muslims, probably without much thinking about it.

hockey hound said...

"people like HH put the blame on the Muslims"

No, I put the blame on their religion.("...the West is still sleep-walking and has not realized that the religion of Islam is the only locus of terrorism...") You missed my point altogether.

Racism? Give me a break. It's called honest discussion. This excoriation from someone who regards the murder of "Westerners" as mere political ire and not racism. You must believe, therefore, that Hitler's mass murder and starvation of how many Russian citizens was simply a natural and well-deserved consequence of their Marxist-Leninism and not because Adolf Hitler might have been a tiny bit racist toward the "Slavs".

You must be one of those activists who believe murdering Israeli Jews solely because of their politics ("It's not because they're Jewish!") is also not "racism". It's not an act of racism to murder Israeli Jews if one commits the crime because of one's disapproval of the Israeli government's treatment of the Palestinians. The Rabbi and his wife were simply the victims of something political, not because of their Jewishness. And even though every one of these terrorists were Muslim, the religion of Islam has no connection whatsoever to the Rabbi's and his wife's horrible end, right? You are sleep-walking too.

It was reported in the news today that certain Muslim residents of Mumbai assisted the terrorists in "scoping" out the places they later attacked; also it was stated by the only terrorist captured that these crimes were committed because of Israel's treatment of the Palestinians. These Muslims were not, when measured by Western media standards, terrorists, so why didn't the fundamental values of Islam prevent these same Muslims from becoming accessory to such atrocious deeds? Who is deserving of blame here, these Muslims or their religion? Or are these particular Muslims AND their religion both culpable? These are questions the politically correct media and academia refuse to ask, and all the while people are dying horrible deaths, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, because of such shameless cowardice.

dan said...

Hockey Hound, you amaze me! When you write that "....how can the world continue to believe that anti-Jewish hatred is not the intended efficacy of the Koran?"....you sound like someone who is not aware that the so-called New Testament that YOU follow is and always has been full of anti-Jewish hatred and Christian triumphalism, and here you are pointing the finger at the Koran, look at your own Good Book, sir, it planted and still plants every Sunday in churches around the world the seeds of Christian anti-Jewish prejudice which is based on pure fictional fairytale of a some GodSon who rises from the Dead.

Look at your own so-called NEW AND IMPROVED "NEW" Testmant book first, sir, before you point at the Koran. Christians are in fact more anti-Jewish than Moslems. Examine yourself first. What chutzpah you have! It's comical, I mean, You are comical.

-- danny

of course, i mean no disrespect, sir

Epaminondas said...

Anti semitism is not the intent of the quran, but as Tantawi and MANY MANY authoritative others have made plain, and as Andrew Bostom's voluminous proofs have made clear, anti semitism is a part of the Qruan the Hadiths and the religion every bit as much as belief that Muhammad is a model human.
Since the quran is, to those believers, the unimpeachable and immutable word of god, many cannot recognize that what they do is racism, since they are merely following that god and the hadiths.

There is undoubtedly a large % of muslims who consciences are revolted by the acts we see, and have seen, but to TOO many, as many polls have proved, while they would not commit the acts they have seen, they are at least sympathetic to the purpose of what they have seen. They are sympathetic because the quran is immutable, and therefore they MUST be.

That is the crux of this war.
That is why such actors will NEVER miss a chance to kill the jew, because it is a 'good' deed. So while going after the brits, and satan's whelps (us), why not take a swipe at the Lubavitch who were so handy and earn few extra points.

For the anchors at CNN to comprehend and admit to such a set of facts is, in fact, a resignation statement on air. But to admit to, and display, such confusion on air, is a resignation from fact and knowledge and history.

But better that, than the bitter and ugly reality, apparently.

hockey hound said...

Again, Dan, I am not a Christian, I am a Noachide. Noachism is taught by Orthodox Jews. Noachism predates Christianity and Islam. Noachism is in no way connected to Christianity.

dan said...

Hockey Hound wrote, above: "Again, Dan, I am not a Christian, I am a Noachide. Noachism is taught by Orthodox Jews. Noachism predates Christianity and Islam. Noachism is in no way connected to Christianity."

In that case, sir, I apologize for those above comments, and I stand correctd. Thanks for the clarification. So in other words, Noachide people in no way believe in Jesus as a messiah? Can you confimr that yes or no in later comments here? Thanks for clarification. This is very interesting...

dan said...

The preparations for the atrocity began a year earlier in a remote mountain camp in Muzaffarabad, in Pakistan- administered Kashmir, according to the interrogation of a 19-year-old believed to be the only member of the terrorist unit to be captured alive.

It was in Rawalpindi that the 10-man team were briefed in detail with digitised images of their prospective targets – the Taj Mahal and Oberoi Hotels, the Jewish Centre and the Victoria Terminus railway station. Each member of the team memorised street names and routes to each location. Kamal told his interrogators that most of the targeting information came from a reconnaissance team which had selected the targets earlier in the year.

hockey hound said...

No apology needed, Dan.

Do a google search using 'Noachide' and you will find everything you need to know.

Prof. Lipstadt has been so patient with us! :-))

hockey hound said...

"So in other words, Noachide people in no way believe in Jesus as a messiah?"

No, we do not believe Jesus as Moshiach.

Noachides believe everything the Jewish people believe, Dan. One difference is the obvious, that we are Gentile. Another is that we [Gentiles/Noachides] are commanded to observe Seven Laws while the Jewish people are commanded to observe 613 Laws.

Deborah Lipstadt said...

Dan/HH: I have been patient because I wanted to be fair and each time I wanted to cut your conversation off I felt i had to give the other the chance to respond.

Let's leave your exchange off at this point...

Mukhtar said...

HH, what is with your blatant racism and bigotry? Do you not understand that possibly reading the Qur'an a little (and understanding the context and Arabic, both of which are extremely important), and many have asked you to do this, you will gain a better understanding of things? The Qur'an states to take one human life is to take the life of all of mankind. Do these "Muslim" terrorists follow that statement? No. Tell me this: were the attacks on Mumbai in defense or offense? Muslims are only allowed to fight physically in self-defense and only as a last resort. Clearly this isn't being followed by these "Muslim" terrorists.

Learn something, and please shut up.

Furthermore, with all of this racist speech here, I would find it MOST appropriate if Prof. Lipstadt would put in a statement of disapproval of HH's comments against Islam. She has no problem addressing statements against Jews or Judaism, but withdraws from statements against Muslims or Islam.

Roman Werpachowski said...

@HH

Most religious texts can be interpreted in so many ways, that saying "Islam is the cause of terror because Quran says XXX and YYY" is a bit biased -- I could find passages in the Bible which would convince you that it's Christanity or Judaism which breed terror. And I could even back up my statements about Christianity (at least) with well-known historical events. The fact that I would have more trouble with "proving" that Judaism leads to terror is that the Jews did not have many chances in history to slaughter/enslave anyone else. Until very recently, most societies/religious groups were very eager to commit terrible cruelty against other societies/religious groups, when given an opportunity to do so.

My personal opinion is that it is not this or that religion which encourages terrorism - it's religion per se which encourages people to stop thinking for themselves and blindly follow authority, and this has lead to many crimes and cruelties in the past.

hockey hound said...

I can, Mukhtar, list you an endless stream of violent passages about killing the "infidel" simply because those infidels (another nice word found in the Koran) are not willing to convert. As for being racist, tell us about the relationship between the Arab Muslims and the [black] Moors of Spain way back when (right after Islam's armies INVADED Spain (oh, yes, they weren't real Muslims, were they), or about the Arab Musilms (the janjaweed) of the Sudan and how they have raped and murdered (to the point of genocide) their fellow black Sudanese Muslims.

One cannot judge a religion by the behaviour of it exceptional personalities, but only by how that religion manifests itself within the masses of those who adhere to its tenets. In this respect Islam has failed miserably.

Truth is, Islam's followers are not "repenting" of their terrorism but merely glossing over Islam's violent past and present (let's not overlook Islam's expansionist dogma) with apologia. Conversely, Christianity and many of its followers have actually shown remorse and have taken responsibility for the Holocaust (and I'm not speaking here of the false remorse and sophistry of James Carroll).

You accusing me of a bigotry sounds only as a most pathetic cavil. You need to join your voice to those very, very few of Islam (most of them women) who condemn Muslim terrorists for their "terrorism" instead of echoing the same old rote accusations and apologia already overused by even the Islamist Imams themselves. Who do you want to be identified with?

Mukhtar said...

"I can, Mukhtar, list you an endless stream of violent passages about killing the "infidel" simply because those infidels (another nice word found in the Koran) are not willing to convert."

You could try, I guess, but the point is that I could disprove you on every single instance that you think the Qur'an incites violence. And no, don't go on some website and copy/paste allegations like I see so many bigots before you do. I've been through that process.

"As for being racist, tell us about the relationship between the Arab Muslims and the [black] Moors of Spain way back when (right after Islam's armies INVADED Spain (oh, yes, they weren't real Muslims, were they), or about the Arab Musilms (the janjaweed) of the Sudan and how they have raped and murdered (to the point of genocide) their fellow black Sudanese Muslims."

Those allegations have nothing to do with your being a racist (which you didn't deny) or my religion. Christians took control of India and, to make an example of the resistance movement, tied them to canons and blew them apart. I'm not going to blame Christianity for that, however.

"One cannot judge a religion by the behaviour of it exceptional personalities, but only by how that religion manifests itself within the masses of those who adhere to its tenets. In this respect Islam has failed miserably. "

Meet a common Muslim and you'll find yourself at fault. Some Muslims only have sympathy for terrorists sometimes because they are vehemently against Israel or America. It has nothing to do with Islam.

"Truth is, Islam's followers are not "repenting" of their terrorism but merely glossing over Islam's violent past and present (let's not overlook Islam's expansionist dogma) with apologia."

Sit in on a Friday prayer sometime. I've heard many times the Imam talk about terrorism and its evils. And for "expansionist dogma," look up Christianity's past. Once again, I don't blame Christianity as a religion.

"Conversely, Christianity and many of its followers have actually shown remorse and have taken responsibility for the Holocaust "

They can if they want to. Many Muslims do not feel that they should apologize for lunatics who use their religion as a scapegoat. The religion itself is against terrorism and the actions of a "moderate" Muslim should speak for themselves. Once again, sit in on a Friday prayer, and you'll hear the Imam talk about doing righteous deeds as he does almost every Friday.

"You accusing me of a bigotry sounds only as a most pathetic cavil. You need to join your voice to those very, very few of Islam (most of them women) who condemn Muslim terrorists for their "terrorism""

You perform the straw-man fallacy because you cannot defend yourself of bigotry. Admit your bigotry, which is blatantly apparent. And for condemning Muslim terrorists, check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOXYPxDTIY8&feature=related

Racism cannot win, HH. You should learn that.

hockey hound said...

"The religion itself is against terrorism and the actions of a "moderate" Muslim should speak for themselves"

I blame Christianity for the Holocaust and I blame Islam for terrorism and anti-Jewish sentiment in the Middle East. As for India, Muslims have a history there too, and not a bright one.

It may be taboo to blame a religion for the violence and genocical ideologies it precipitates among its adherents, but it's surely not racism. The only "straw man fallacy" is your denigration of me as a racist. If you'll read my posts again, I did not call you a racist because of your racist religion. When I have lost a debate, I admit to that loss. But I certainly do not resort to name-calling when I find that my religion (in your case Islam) has been found wanting.

"I could disprove you on every single instance that you think the Qur'an"

This is a tactic used by Christians and Muslims since the beginning of their human inventions (and the religious colloquy Prof. Lipstadt will not permit on this blog). Simply quoting endless "scriptures" to rebut scriptures to the contrary prove nothing. We're talking about veridical Islam, the Islam that exists in the world today, which would include the anti-Israel (read anti-Jewish)and anti-Western hatred that exists in the Middle East.

You seem to have this pronoid opinion of Islam, as if you have not read the anti-Jewish garbage printed in Arab Muslim ("common Muslims")newspapers and in countless books written by Muslim clerics.

As for those Muslims who have "sympathy for terrorists," well, that just strengthens my arguement and proves how inured Muslims like you are to terrorist ideology and violence. My point here is that salubrious religions can boast of preventing such an in vacuo.

"And for "expansionist dogma," look up Christianity's past"

This debate is not about Christianity, it's about Islam and the present barbarity I believe it has precipitated. Please don't complicate this discussion with cavil.

This blog is about the Holocaust and anti-Jewish hatred. I am here because I see that every terrorist attack against the Jewish people is committed by Muslims. This is not the fault of "common Muslims" nor you. It is the fault of Islam. Unfortunate and discomposing as that may be for you, it is still a reality Muslims have a difficult time owning up to.

Of course, as a Muslim you cannot admit to the disparities and malefic aspects of your personal choice of religion. But think about it: If Islam is not to blame for terrorism, why has the term "moderate Islam" been adapted by pluralists and apologists? It's as Sam Harris wrote, "We have a problem with Islamic fundamentalism because we have a problem with the fundamentals of Islam." I can't say it any better than that.

I am not a racist, I simply do not respect taboos. "Necessity breaks iron."

Mukhtar said...

"It may be taboo to blame a religion for the violence and genocical ideologies it precipitates among its adherents, but it's surely not racism."

If you denigrate my religion, you are, in effect, denigrating me. Although you may not see it that way, that is essentially what happens. So, yes, you are being a racist. Sure, you can say "I don't particularly like Islam," but to speak out against the religion at every point you can muster is really what makes a kaafir, a term so popular among extremist Muslims.

"We're talking about veridical Islam, the Islam that exists in the world today, which would include the anti-Israel (read anti-Jewish)and anti-Western hatred that exists in the Middle East."

Then, you are talking about the actions of fallible human beings, not Islam. What I take as Islam is what I take from the Qur'an.

"As for those Muslims who have "sympathy for terrorists," well, that just strengthens my arguement and proves how inured Muslims like you are to terrorist ideology and violence."

Many Easterners make a connection with a religion and the violence their country caused. Israel is a self-proclaimed state for the Jewish people, and when Israel does the things they do, many would infer that as Jews doing it. Likewise when America does the things she does, people view that as Christians doing it. I, personally, don't view it as such at all. This is the cause of human fallibility, not the religion itself (nor the religions of Jewish people or Christians).

"Unfortunate and discomposing as that may be for you, it is still a reality Muslims have a difficult time owning up to."

Because it is not true? Because we go to Friday prayers all the time in which the Imam says that righteous deeds pleases God? Because when I read the Qur'an I find hundreds of instances were God does not like transgressors, aggressors, or people who do malicious deeds?

I'm not posting again for respect of Dr. Lipstadt's blog. I've made my point to any who encounter this argument. Before lambasting a person's religion, do a little research about it and don't judge it based off of the characters of certain individuals.

Deborah Lipstadt said...

I think it is time to shut this exchange down. I am not an Islam specialist and cannot really involve myself in this discussion. In the interest of free exchange I let it go on but I think it has reached its end... at least here.