"Death of Laden" Discovery channel 9 pm programme Indian enemy

[ptltejas]

Spcial programme on death of laden today on discovery at 9'o clock.

 

[ptltejas]

The programme regarding death of laden today will shown on discovery channel at 9pm. he was Indian enemy with hates for indian. he was anti human and killed by US commandoes. must watch. It shall give brief ideas regarding how the commando attacks performed against commandoes.


Submit your posts during u watch the programme.

 

[gaurish]

Discovery Channel

 

[IFB]

Got this via ******** some time ago.....sharing it here do watch it

 

[EjazR]

He was more an US enemy that Indian enemy. His attacks were targeted against the US and ARab govt. like Saudi ARabia. He also was against any muslim who did not agree with his point of view and justified killing of civilians which was unISlamic.

Infact, he hardly ever mentioned India at all. It was all about the US mainly. I don't know where you got the impression from.

Looks likes an interesting docu in any case.

 

[StormShadow]

He was more an US enemy that Indian enemy. His attacks were targeted against the US and ARab govt. like Saudi ARabia. He also was against any muslim who did not agree with his point of view and justified killing of civilians which was unISlamic.

Infact, he hardly ever mentioned India at all. It was all about the US mainly. I don't know where you got the impression from.

It seems you are un aware of the fact that Ilyas kashmiri was affiliated to AQ and he had the blessings of OBL to target India.

 

[Laughing_soldier]

He was more an US enemy that Indian enemy. His attacks were targeted against the US and ARab govt. like Saudi ARabia. He also was against any muslim who did not agree with his point of view and justified killing of civilians which was unISlamic.

Infact, he hardly ever mentioned India at all. It was all about the US mainly. I don't know where you got the impression from.

Looks likes an interesting docu in any case.

AQ has full cooperation with LeT.

 

[Gandhi G in da house]

He was more an US enemy that Indian enemy. His attacks were targeted against the US and ARab govt. like Saudi ARabia. He also was against any muslim who did not agree with his point of view and justified killing of civilians which was unISlamic.

Infact, he hardly ever mentioned India at all. It was all about the US mainly. I don't know where you got the impression from.

Looks likes an interesting docu in any case.

Ejaz bhai , all these extremists come from the same ideology and they are all our enemies irrespective of their organisation , religion , country of origin or whatever .

 

[EjazR]

It seems you are un aware of the fact that Ilyas kashmiri was affiliated to AQ and he had the blessings of OBL to target India.

I was talking specifically about OBL. Not Ilyas Kashmiri.

You can look up all his speeches and work. OBL does not speak about India. His group that he formed in 1998 was called United Islamic Front for struggle against Jews and Crusaders referring to Israel and America.

The only time he spoke about India was when he pasingly mentioned Kashmir in 2006 in a video along with Palestine and other issues. Other than that, even Indian intel agencies and officers admit that
AQ has never directly targeted India.

What I am saying is put the perspective in the right place.

The biggest enemies of OBL was probably American, Arab govt. and other muslims who don't follow his ideology in that order based on the targeted attacks that he approved of.

The enemies of India are Pakistani based India centric groups like LeT, HuJI - which Ilyas Kashmiri headed and so on.

Its important to make the difference between operational tactics of what each group does. Like Sun Tzu said, “Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.” So if you don't know who your enemy is, you are liable to result in wrong conclusions.

Infact, in a perverse sort of way OBL coming to Pakistan helped in moving the attention of India-centric terrorist groups in Pakistan towards the US and Afghanistan and even the PA/ISI. One of the reasons why Ilyas Kashmiri started targeting Pakistani military targets.

Again, OBL has a lot of innocent blood on his hand, and more muslims have been killed by OBL than anyone else. There is no doubt that he deserved to die. What I am trying to explain is that for people who want to analyse threats to India and who there enemy is, they need to think critically and see between the lines.

 

[ptltejas]

I was talking specifically about OBL. Not Ilyas Kashmiri.

You can look up all his speeches and work. OBL does not speak about India. His group that he formed in 1998 was called United Islamic Front for struggle against Jews and Crusaders referring to Israel and America.

The only time he spoke about India was when he pasingly mentioned Kashmir in 2006 in a video along with Palestine and other issues. Other than that, even Indian intel agencies and officers admit that
AQ has never directly targeted India.

What I am saying is put the perspective in the right place.

The biggest enemies of OBL was probably American, Arab govt. and other muslims who don't follow his ideology in that order based on the targeted attacks that he approved of.

The enemies of India are Pakistani based India centric groups like LeT, HuJI - which Ilyas Kashmiri headed and so on.

Its important to make the difference between operational tactics of what each group does. Like Sun Tzu said, “Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.” So if you don't know who your enemy is, you are liable to result in wrong conclusions.

Infact, in a perverse sort of way OBL coming to Pakistan helped in moving the attention of India-centric terrorist groups in Pakistan towards the US and Afghanistan and even the PA/ISI. One of the reasons why Ilyas Kashmiri started targeting Pakistani military targets.

Again, OBL has a lot of innocent blood on his hand, and more muslims have been killed by OBL than anyone else. There is no doubt that he deserved to die. What I am trying to explain is that for people who want to analyse threats to India and who there enemy is, they need to think critically and see between the lines.

OSAMA BIN LADEN MENTIONED ONE TIME KASHMIR

Srinagar May 03 (Only Kashmir): Though no attack on India has been directly tracked back to Osama bin Laden , the motley group of radical Islamists everywhere who united under the al-Qaeda umbrella might have supported terror attacks on Indian soil.
Even though the dreaded self-proclaimed holy warrior only once mentioned India in his televised addresses, he was regarded a credible threat to the country, as a terrorist with the means to galvanise and support various groups working against the state.
In a statement aired by Al Jazeera on April 23, 2006, bin Laden spoke of India and Kashmir for the first time directly and claimed there was a Zionist-Hindu conspiracy against Muslims.
"A UN resolution passed more than half a century ago gave Muslim Kashmir the liberty of choosing independence from India. (US President) George Bush, the leader of the crusaders' campaign, announced a few days ago that he will order his converted agent (Pakistani President General Pervez) Musharraf to shut down the Kashmir mujahideen camps, thus affirming that it is a Zionist-Hindu war against Muslims ," bin Laden said.
He appealed to his supporters to support the insurgency in Kashmir. "It is the duty for the Umma with all its categories, men, women and youths, to give away themselves, their money, experiences and all types of material support, enough to establish jihad particularly in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Sudan, Kashmir and Chechnya."
Though disparate radical elements within India might have drawn inspiration from bin Laden's activities, al-Qaeda was never able to attract significant number of recruits from among India's estimated 160 million Muslims.
"Bin Laden's message is unlikely to resonate deeply in Indian states with higher Muslim concentrations. Although the country has a long and bloody history of communal violence between Hindus and Muslims, the more radical segments of India's Muslim population have kept their conflict localised and have avoided taking part in the global jihadist movement," the geopolitical intelligence firm Stratfor noted in a paper in 2006.
"Instead, bin Laden's words of inspiration will likely spur greater militant activity by Kashmir-based militants, which could materialise as an attack within a major urban centre in India," the paper added, then.

http://onlykashmir.blogspot.com/2011/05/osama-bin-laden-mentioned-one-time.html

plz go through it. Muslim countries have gold mines. A black gold petrolium. gift of allah.

They never or heardly spent money for development. Why they not do competition in following area.

1) no muslim country spent on satelite making
2) no muslim country lauch their own rockets except iran. however iran mainly consantrating on other process
3) no muslim country is better in electronics
4) no muslim country can make super computers
6) no muslim country is making planes or helicopter
7) no muslim country in car production
8) no muslimvcountry have better refinary of petrolium company.

Pak if ask for money with this muslim nation for infrastructure or economy development or for schools they will say "Amen".
if u ask for money for nuke or terrorism they will give billions $ on demanding millions.

Today muslims require to do to change their image and do competition in other fields.

the most unhappy man in todays world is might be a " true muslim" follow kuran and love peace and non violence.

 

[StormShadow]

I was talking specifically about OBL. Not Ilyas Kashmiri.

You can look up all his speeches and work. OBL does not speak about India. His group that he formed in 1998 was called United Islamic Front for struggle against Jews and Crusaders referring to Israel and America.

The only time he spoke about India was when he pasingly mentioned Kashmir in 2006 in a video along with Palestine and other issues. Other than that, even Indian intel agencies and officers admit that
AQ has never directly targeted India.

What I am saying is put the perspective in the right place.

The biggest enemies of OBL was probably American, Arab govt. and other muslims who don't follow his ideology in that order based on the targeted attacks that he approved of.

The enemies of India are Pakistani based India centric groups like LeT, HuJI - which Ilyas Kashmiri headed and so on.

Its important to make the difference between operational tactics of what each group does. Like Sun Tzu said, “Know your enemy and know yourself and you can fight a hundred battles without disaster.” So if you don't know who your enemy is, you are liable to result in wrong conclusions.

Infact, in a perverse sort of way OBL coming to Pakistan helped in moving the attention of India-centric terrorist groups in Pakistan towards the US and Afghanistan and even the PA/ISI. One of the reasons why Ilyas Kashmiri started targeting Pakistani military targets.

Again, OBL has a lot of innocent blood on his hand, and more muslims have been killed by OBL than anyone else. There is no doubt that he deserved to die. What I am trying to explain is that for people who want to analyse threats to India and who there enemy is, they need to think critically and see between the lines.

What are you saying? Killing of OBL was a blessing for India. The fact that OBL was sheltered by Pak proves that he is as much threat to India as America.
Go through this link first...
The Hindu : Front Page : Ilyas Kashmiri wanted to provoke India-Pakistan war

Moreover, Do you think LeT is capable of pulling of a large scale massacre such as mumbai without the help of AQ?
Check this out.
ISI scripted 26/11 Mumbai attacks, approved by al-Qaida: Shahzad book - The Economic Times

 

[EjazR]

What are you saying? Killing of OBL was a blessing for India. The fact that OBL was sheltered by Pak proves that he is as much threat to India as America.
Go through this link first...
The Hindu : Front Page : Ilyas Kashmiri wanted to provoke India-Pakistan war
Moreover, Do you think LeT is capable of pulling of a large scale massacre such as mumbai without the help of AQ?
Check this out.
ISI scripted 26/11 Mumbai attacks, approved by al-Qaida: Shahzad book - The Economic Times

When did I say OBL being killed is not good? I am questioning wether OBL really considered India as the major enemy as the OP was trying to make it out to be. I am saying he was not focused on India like other terrorists. It was much better if Hafiz SAeed, MAssood Azhar or Ilyas Kashmiri were killed because they directly target India.

And readup on Ilays Kashmir history. He headed HuJI which was separate from AQ. It was only around 2006-2007 that he moved closer to AQ. AQ agenda was always targeting the US and west and distracted Indian-centric groups like HuJI or LeT from attacking India.

And LeT doesn't need AQ's help. They are quite capable of doing that themselves. And PA army and navy personnel allegedly helped in the attack. If you follow Headley's trial, has he mentioned AQ/OBL anywhere? Again read up on Ilyas Kashmiri history and you will know that he headed HuJI and only was much later that he was associated with AQ and that too not directly.

 

[EjazR]

@ptltejas

The article you posted actually reaffirms my point. OBL mentioned Kashmir once in 2006. And if you had listened to his entire speech you would know what the main focus of his speech was. He mentioned it in the context of targeting Musharraf for assassination and a global call for attack on different countries like Sudan Afghanistan e.t.c. The one and only time he mentioned it.

The fact remains that we have never had an Arab being involved or committing a terrorist act on Indian soil, or on Indian interests outside. All terrorist attacks wether even in Afghanistan were done by Pakistanis or Pakistani based terrorist groups.

And the rest of your post about oil wealth. I'm not sure what you mean. Personally, I don't see it as "Muslim wealth" I see it as Iranian, Iraqi or Saudi wealth and its upto them on how to use it.

And just to give you a quick correction on some common misconceptions
Saudis are the highest donating country as a pecentage of GDP in the world to the UN aid program, they also have the biggest refining and petrochmeical industries. Google Saudi ARamco and SABIC to find out more

The Turks have actually developed their own satellites and there are many other countries too. An AFghan was the first Muslim in space and has been followed by a SAudi. An Iranian women was the first muslim woman in space.

And Saudi Arabia actually is building a supercomputer that is expected to get the 6th position in the world. I don't know how much indigenous materials are being used but an interesting news item to read Saudi supercomputer lures researchers | Reuters

I think, the media perception of the past decade is the cause of most of these misconceptions. I suggest reading up news online from Arab countries specifically but other ocuntries like Indonesia, Turkey, Malaysia as well and you would be pleasantly surprised. I think its high time we do the extra effort to see the change taking place in the Arab world, but also know that they represent only 18% of muslims world wide and not miss out Turkey, Indonesia and all the other countries were 80% of Muslims live.

 

[ptltejas]

When did I say OBL being killed is not good? I am questioning wether OBL really considered India as the major enemy as the OP was trying to make it out to be. I am saying he was not focused on India like other terrorists. It was much better if Hafiz SAeed, MAssood Azhar or Ilyas Kashmiri were killed because they directly target India.

And readup on Ilays Kashmir history. He headed HuJI which was separate from AQ. It was only around 2006-2007 that he moved closer to AQ. AQ agenda was always targeting the US and west and distracted Indian-centric groups like HuJI or LeT from attacking India.

And LeT doesn't need AQ's help. They are quite capable of doing that themselves. And PA army and navy personnel allegedly helped in the attack. If you follow Headley's trial, has he mentioned AQ/OBL anywhere? Again read up on Ilyas Kashmiri history and you will know that he headed HuJI and only was much later that he was associated with AQ and that too not directly.

man u r right. he might be not a main enemy but he was against human kind and killed many people so in end its happy destruction One hr to Programme i m waiting.

 

[StormShadow]

When did I say OBL being killed is not good? I am questioning wether OBL really considered India as the major enemy as the OP was trying to make it out to be. I am saying he was not focused on India like other terrorists. It was much better if Hafiz SAeed, MAssood Azhar or Ilyas Kashmiri were killed because they directly target India.

Are you understanding what you are writing? Why was Al-qaida not a "major" threat? ["major" or minor a threat is a threat] Have you forgot the warnings AQ gave to India if India attacks Pakistan? Or are you acting as if you dont know? Do u think the above mentioned terrorists have no relation with OBL? If you still think AQ poses no "major" threat to India, it is better u read this article.
Al Qaeda threatens India with 'humiliation' if Pakistan is attacked - The Long War Journal

And readup on Ilays Kashmir history. He headed HuJI which was separate from AQ. It was only around 2006-2007 that he moved closer to AQ. AQ agenda was always targeting the US and west and distracted Indian-centric groups like HuJI or LeT from attacking India.

How does it matter when Ilyas kashmiri moved towards AQ? The bottom line is he and OBL are linked, that is enough to consider OBL a grave threat to India.

And LeT doesn't need AQ's help. They are quite capable of doing that themselves. And PA army and navy personnel allegedly helped in the attack. If you follow Headley's trial, has he mentioned AQ/OBL anywhere? Again read up on Ilyas Kashmiri history and you will know that he headed HuJI and only was much later that he was associated with AQ and that too not directly.

Again I'm reiterating the same point. It dosent matter when he joined his hands, the only thing which matters is if they were partners or not.
Regarding bolded part of the quote, I just want to reming you that Ilyas kashmiri was a front runner for the AQ top spot. AQ is not dumb to select a contender who is not directly linked.