Mumbai Attack - Armed police would not fire back!

Originally posted by 44soulslayer
lol look at Jinni desperately trying to find someone other than Pakistan to blame the attacks on. Im really starting to think that if you compared Jinni's IP address to Token's they would be the same... hows that for a conspiracy.

Lets see what comes out of the investigation- then lets draw conclusions.

I also found it rather telling that the site he linked to was tinged with Islamic undertones and pro-Pakistani overtones... clear deflection in an attempt to deny who is behind the attacks. Even the site points out though that if the RSS were implicated in the previous bombings in september, it would be the first time that a hindu group was behind it... as opposed to the thousandth attack by extremist muslims.

You don't do much other than make thread of conversation personal do you? I disagree completely with a lot t0ken says and you can see that in previous posts.

I don't see why you're getting so upset just be me posting news from reputable news organisations.

Most news that we know of about the events of Mumbai are those by Hindu Indian News Organisations.

Are you calling for an independent investigation? I would support that...

The news I posted was mentioned on SKY news and BBC (I think) detailing that the Officers killed were involved in implicating Hindu terrorist organisations for previous terror attacks. So it's not just my word!

Don't get your knickers in a twist just because you disagree and can't handle the truth! Perhaps you are keen to spread disinfo which is why my posts bother you so much.

IT WAS YOUR MAN "Hermant Karkare" THAT WAS INVOLVED IN THE INVESTIGATIONS. NOT MY WORDS BUT FACT.

P.S. You don't provide much comment do you on the actual facts I bring up do you? Other than personal insults and accusations. You seem to be a pro-Indian disinfo agent. Your avatar says it all!

[edit on 30-11-2008 by Jinni]

And you just proved yourself to be a fascist who doesn't seem to understand anything.

Can you please tell us how you define 'fascism'.

What the religion dictates and what people actually do are two different things. I am saying that the religions are all about peace.

Just taking Judaism, Christianity and Islam, actually reading their sacred writings(Tanakh, Bible, Quran) and studying their prophets lives, you will find that murder, injustice and outright genocide was central to all of these. The only exception was Jesus, he was all talk, but his followers certainly did not hessitate to go all in, when their prophet died.

Islam is not a cult. It's the world fastest growing religion and most adhered. The attraction is it's emphasis of peace.

Let's not forget that 'Islam' means 'peace through submission'.

Please stop being bigoted and fascist. You sound like some fundamentalist extremist wanting to terminate all followers of Islam.

Perhaps you should stop using a word like fascism when it is obvious that you haven't the slightest idea what it means. Fascism is not just a fancy word for someone you don't like... It has an actual meaning.

Further, when you use strong loaded words out of context, you demean their value.

It seems that perhaps you are incapable of reading \ understanding things and are totally ignorant of facts and basic contextual knowledge.

It would appear that you see the splinter in your brothers eye, but not the beam in your own.

reply to post by Jinni


Or they had guns that did not work. I cannot vouch for the veracity of this, but this was on another forum:

"In addition all weapons currently in police service need to be checked for serviceability. Remember when Ribero took charge of the Punjab police, 20% of the 0.303s were incapable of firing a single shot. The story of RPF constable M.L. Chaudhary is poignant - he returns fire but his rifle refuses to work after 2 shots."

This is very similar to the activity we saw from the officers in the University shooting here. They geared up in their $5000 "Darth Vader" gear locked and loaded and "hid" behind trees and brand new vehicles while shots and screams rang out in the distance.

When the sniper in Austin was taking pot shots from the infamous tower, police were aided by students professors and bystanders who had rifle racks in their trucks and brought him down. Today those same samaritans would sooner be engaged by the officers they were attempting to assist.

And I know the arguments for inaction are "well somebody will launch a lawsuit" Blah, blah, blah. But dammit there was a time when police officers used to made of better stuff and were not neutered "revenue collectors".

Of course they have been found picking on the weak among us, because they are soft targets, just like the school yard. The big guy picks on the little guy. Nothing has changed. What is gonna happen when these guys come across something they are not ready for.

This country is already producing an innordinate ammount of people who are finding themselves in an "I have nothing left to lose" scenario. How are police who are used to yessirs and yesmamms gonna deal with that. Oh thats right - they aren't. And that my friends is why you will see troops on our streets in the very near future.

You should know that the ultimate jurisdiction in any County or Parrish is its Sheriff - look it up.

Do not allow the Military and Feds tell our Sheriffs what to do or not to do.

Originally posted by aaa2500

And you just proved yourself to be a fascist who doesn't seem to understand anything.

Can you please tell us how you define 'fascism'.

What the religion dictates and what people actually do are two different things. I am saying that the religions are all about peace.

Just taking Judaism, Christianity and Islam, actually reading their sacred writings(Tanakh, Bible, Quran) and studying their prophets lives, you will find that murder, injustice and outright genocide was central to all of these. The only exception was Jesus, he was all talk, but his followers certainly did not hessitate to go all in, when their prophet died.

Islam is not a cult. It's the world fastest growing religion and most adhered. The attraction is it's emphasis of peace.

Let's not forget that 'Islam' means 'peace through submission'.

Please stop being bigoted and fascist. You sound like some fundamentalist extremist wanting to terminate all followers of Islam.

Perhaps you should stop using a word like fascism when it is obvious that you haven't the slightest idea what it means. Fascism is not just a fancy word for someone you don't like... It has an actual meaning.

Further, when you use strong loaded words out of context, you demean their value.

It seems that perhaps you are incapable of reading \ understanding things and are totally ignorant of facts and basic contextual knowledge.

It would appear that you see the splinter in your brothers eye, but not the beam in your own.

"Fascists typically seek to form a mass movement of militants who are willing to engage in violence against their perceived enemies"

And the use tools of generalisation such as 'Kill ALL Muslims', 'All Muslims are evil'.

I am not demeaning their value but using them in response to a very strong statement abiut 'ALL Muslims'.

I do know what it means thank you very much.

You clearly don't know much about religion so I won't go there. Peace through submission is true what is wrong with that? No Muslim is allowed to even touch a hair on an innocents head during war otherwise there is hell waiting for him\her.

Murder and genocide is not 'central' to any of these religions as you put. They are events that happened in the past during times of war. ALl preached peace AND self-defence.

I don't see what point you're making...

"Fascists typically seek to form a mass movement of militants who are willing to engage in violence against their perceived enemies"

So does every revolutionary movement, be it ideological or religious.

And the use tools of generalisation such as 'Kill ALL Muslims', 'All Muslims are evil'.

And where did CaptainCaveMan write that?

I am not demeaning their value but using them in response to a very strong statement abiut 'ALL Muslims'.

I have reread the statements you refer to in your earlier reply and although they are broad generalisations, I don't see the term 'all muslims'.

I do know what it means thank you very much.

Apparently not. Fascism is a socioeconomic phenomenon based on nationalist/conservative values and control of the state being taken over by a corporate elite. How, when and if blackshirts are even needed is a big question.

You clearly don't know much about religion so I won't go there.

Ahh, you are proud and arrogant. Traits that are strongly warned against in the quran, even to the extent of denying the proud and the arrogant entry into heaven.

Peace through submission is true what is wrong with that?

I will not be bound.

No Muslim is allowed to even touch a hair on an innocents head during war otherwise there is hell waiting for him\her.

Oh it sounds so wonderful, except according to islamic tradition, noone is really innocent, particularly not during war. As long as you are the same nationality, tribe, family or even just a fellow resident of a city as someone who angered one or more muslims, you are fair game.

This philosophy has the advantage of creating an eternal state of war. Islam is always at war with someone, just like in the good old days of the prophet. The house of peace surrounded by those cheeky infidel enemies, with their anti-islamic 'peace without submission' and unjust world power.

Murder and genocide is not 'central' to any of these religions as you put. They are events that happened in the past during times of war.

Not quite. In judaism killing people was part of the law and genocide was sanctioned by god. Read the old testament. In islam, the prophet mohammad had whole tribes murdered and metered out punishments with such cruelty that he was even admonished by god(Abu Dawud, no. 4357). In christianity, well Jesus said it himself 'Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.'(Matthew 10:34-39).

I don't see what point you're making...

You object to someone making broad and bigotted accusations while making broad generalisations and bigotted accusations yourself.

[edit on 30-11-2008 by aaa2500]

The family of a Chabad Center victim has refused to accept an Israeli representative in their son's funeral, saying he was anti-Zionist.

The family of Hasid Aryeh Leib Teitelbaum, who was killed in Mumbai attacks last week, also refused to allow the coffin of their son to be covered with Israeli flag.

"Holding a Zionist funeral for Teitelbaum, who was a Satmar Hasid, would desecrate the dead man's honor," Israeli daily Yediot Ahronot quoted a family member as saying.

"I'm sending a message from the family. We don't want the State to meddle in our grief. Suddenly Israel has an interest to show the world that it is also a victim of global jihad, so it decides to throw a big ceremony with a coffin wrapped in a flag. We object to this. It pains us and offends our values," Shmuel Pfenheim of the Haredi Community anti-Zionist stream was quoted by the newspaper as saying.

He added that he himself had been an American citizen, and although he had a resident in Israel he wasn't an Israeli national.

Unidentified gunmen attacked Mumbai's Chabad center on Wednesday night. At least nine people were killed in the attack.

THE TRUTH EXIST FOR THOSE WHO TRULY CARE

Thanks to their anti-gun society they were under-armed and under-trained.

MUMBAI: The state constabulary was grossly unprepared to deal with the worst-ever terror attacks on the metropolis because of an acute shortage
of weapons and ammunition.

Official records show that for a force of well over 1.8 lakh, the home department procured a meagre 2,221 weapons — 577 for Mumbai, and 1,644 for the rest of Maharashtra.

‘‘Under the centrally sponsored modernisation programme, we purchased almost all types of weapons, but for a state like Maharashtra, the number of weapons was grossly inadequate ,’’ a senior official told TOI on Monday.

In the absence of a firing range and of ammunition for practice, members of the law enforcement agencies have not opened fire in the last ten years. ‘‘I’ve been in the police force for a long time, but I had no occasion to open fire for practice,’’ a senior inspector of police said. Source

How would you feel if one day at work somebody told you to go confront armed psychos and you've never held a gun let alone trained with one? Make like Spielbergs E.T. edit and wave a walkie-talkie at them?

Sucks for India.

Didnt Russia have a "more soldiers than guns" problem some years ago?
How did they handle that?
Oh yeah. Sucked for Russia. That was an expensive 'win' they won.

This has to do with the British style traditions of the Indian Police system .... regular officers are normally unarmed and are allowed to carry a Webley revolver at their own discretion and are issued Lee Enfield rifles, Sterling SMGs and Bren guns on an as needed basis in emergencies.

Officers assigned to specialized units such as the special branch type units, the national Indian Police Service, the Rapid Action Forces found in each Indian state police force, Central Reserve Police, Industrial Security Force, etc have more modern weaponry like Browning pistols, FN FAL rifles, H&K MP5s, etc

[edit on 4-12-2008 by ChrisF231]