How the media in the West take ONE instance of murder of a journalist so seriously!
The newspapers play a heroic part with a sense of commitment & patriotism in order to highlight the blight and move the public and government opinion.
The idea behind publishing the following long (leading) article in the mass daily in the UK is to ask the INDIAN editors (often called the “coolie press”), too, to raise “HELL” over a single death, be it a soldier’s or a journalist’.
We should also know that the entire investigative might of the world’s super powers is now engaged in identifying the killer and then arresting him. In the meantime the bombing of jihadists in Iraq has intensified. The West has resolved to WIPE OUT the dream of Islamic Caliphate.
We expected BHARAT to stand shoulder to shoulder with the US and the UK in Northern Iraq since the whole world knows that the FRUSTRATED, DEFEATED and HUMILIATED Islam will turn in all fury towards the weak target, our 'mutilated' Hindusthan, that is perennially floating in Political VACUUM!
Unfortunately, people of India (Hindus) usually behave like the Germans in 1940's as in this famous quote: "When they exterminated the gypsies I thought I was safe. I was NOT a gypsy. When they rounded up the Jews I thought I was safe because I was not a Jew. But when at last they came for ME, there was none left alive to come to my help!"
Accordingly when Mohammed invaded Sindh in 712 AD the neighbouring Hindu/Buddhist rulers did not feel threatened. Those who had some grudge against Raja Dahir of Sindh even felt pleased at his fate. But we all know what happened later to ALL of them and to their subjects!
Today it is the SAME Bharat that does not know what will happen to it tomorrow even though the ENEMY is the same, indoctrinated and instigated by the SAME book, in the same language and with the same 'fire spewing' anti Kafir ideology!
Let us continue to follow the story of “Murder of Journalist FOLEY in Iraq” and keep comparing it with the situation in Bharat where neither we hear the word “enemy” nor "Partition".
The Daily Telegraph, London, August 22, 2014. Editorial.
We must confront the enemy in our midst
The grotesque image of two figures in the desert that accompanied the barbaric murder of the American journalist James Foley tells many stories. First, it relates a human tragedy – the death of a loved one that has left parents, children, siblings and relatives grieving for a life viciously ended long before its proper time.
Second, it reminds us of the extraordinary bravery of reporters and photographers who regularly put themselves in danger to find out what is going on in war zones. The same can be said for doctors, nurses and aid workers prepared to travel to the world’s trouble spots to help others. Third, it exemplifies how social media can be exploited by jihadists deliberately to shock and terrorise, with no one able to prevent the dissemination of their propaganda. They are using savagery to instil fear in their opponents and the allure of violence to encourage others to join them.
In addition, it poses a further dilemma for President Barack Obama and American military planners, since a similar death sentence has been passed on another US journalist held captive by the Islamic State of Iraq in the Levant (Isil). Can they mount a rescue operation; or do they, as demanded, scale back their air support for Kurdish and Iraqi forces fighting the jihadists? The former is probably not possible while the latter would be to give in to blackmail. Indeed, American bombers and drones continue their operation in and around the Mosul Dam yesterday.
Finally, a chilling internet video of Mr Foley’s final moments on earth serves as an affront to this country, for his killer speaks with an unmistakable British accent. Not for the first time, a UK citizen has been associated with an act of brutal terrorism and left us all wondering why.
There are an estimated 500 British Muslim men fighting with Isil, though no one knows for sure. The recent establishment of a self-styled caliphate is believed to have triggered a fresh wave of thousands of foreign fighters to the region, attracted by the prospect of the Islamic utopia of which many had dreamt. For years this idea has been planted in the heads of impressionable young men in Britain by organizations such as al-Muhajiroun and Hizb ut-Tahrir and through the spread of Islamist doctrine across the internet.
British Islamists have travelled abroad to fight before in recent years, including the Chechnya, Bosnia, Afghanistan and Libya. But the civil war in Syria and its spill-over into Iraq has attracted more foreign jihadists than any previous conflict, with Britain supplying the greatest number of western recruits. What is it that has made British Muslims more likely to join the jihad against the country that nurtured them than, say, their Italian or French counterparts? Moreover, are the British Islamists that have gone to fight for Isil about to return to cause mayhem on the streets here? True, many will die in Iraq and Syria, as some already have; others will stay until the caliphate is smashed, as it will be eventually. They will then come home, many to resume normal lives but some with a burning resentment of the West, even though they are of the West themselves. What threat will they pose and how is it to be forestalled?
The involvement of a British jihadist in the murder of an American journalist prompted David Cameron to return from his holiday yesterday to chair an emergency planning meeting. But it is not the first time this is happened. Omar Sheikh, a British terrorist of Pakistani descent, remains in jail facing execution for his part in the kidnapping and murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl twelve years ago. Indeed, British-born or raised jihadists have been involved in a number of terror attacks and suicide bombings over the past 15 years or so. But the scale of the potential threat appears to have grown.
We cannot tell the age of the black-clad killer in the photograph standing over a kneeling Mr Foley, but he appears to be in his mid-twenties, which means he will have grown up in a post-9/11 world when the authorities were suddenly alerted to the jihadist threats and supposedly set out to do something about it. But they failed largely because of an institutional reluctance to extol our own values in an ill-starred belief that multi-culturalism was an enlightened policy for a tolerant nation. In reality it was merely sowing the seeds of calamity.
The consequences are now there for all to see. It means that the Jihadists’ rampage through Iraq and the civil war in Syria is not a faraway problem that we can ignore but a conflagration with consequences for us in the West. As Mr Cameron wrote in the Telegraph earlier this week, we may well be embroiled in a generational struggle against a poisonous brand of extremism with the capacity to bring terror to the streets of Britain. The British killer of James Foley does not consider his nationality to be that of the country in which he was raised. Nor do many of his fellow UK jihadists– which is all the more reason to take it off them and prevent their return to this country, assuming they can be identified.
Mr Cameron is right to call for urgent action to defeat the “warped and barbaric” extremists. But we have heard that before; and yet the enemy in our midst has grown stronger.