Astounding Victory for Modi in India Election

Modi, prime ministerial candidate for India's main opposition BJP and Gujarat's chief minister, attends the CAIT national convention in New DelhiBy Pamela Geller:

The results are in and they are astounding. Magnificent. Narendra Modi did wildly better than even the best projections. The BJP (Modi’s party) won over 50 percent of the seats ALONE, without even their handful of ideologically aligned allies.

Despite what the cretins in the media and the Islamic apologists in the political arena tell you, there is major change afoot. I have been seeing it here in the States, and we see lights of hope and truth beginning to blaze across the world.

Perhaps the abject failure of Obama and the loss of America as the stalwart leader for freedom has made people the world over see that they better fight the great fight. The US is being dismantled by a saboteur and she cannot be relied upon.

The rise of UKIP in the UK, Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party in the Netherlands, and now the BJP is a triumph.

“Modi on course for resounding victory in India election,” Reuters, May 15, 2014 (thanks to Ron)

(Reuters) – Early results in India’s general election put opposition leader Narendra Modi on course for an absolute majority on Friday, handing him an unfettered mandate to launch his agenda to revive growth and create jobs.

Partial counts showed Modi’s Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its allies leading in 309 seats out of 543 being contested. The ruling Congress party alliance was ahead in just 72, according to NDTV news.

Read more 

 

Famous Kashmir Vacation Spot Now Teaming With Islamists

Tarek Fatah in KashmirBY TAREK FATAH:

“Death to Israel,” the banner screamed. Next to it was the now-familiar Muslim chant, “Death to America.”

Further down the road, the late Ayatollah Khomeini stared down angrily at the citizenry.

As a large crowd of Sunday shoppers milled around an overflowing open-air bazaar, other banners showed Sayyed Nasrallah of Hezbollah, with former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wearing his familiar sheepish grin.

This banner graces Srinagar’s ‘Laal Chowk’.

No, I was not in Tehran or South Lebanon. This wasn’t an Alawite stronghold in Syria or scenes from Toronto’s infamous annual “Al-Quds” rally staged by Islamists belching disdain towards the West.

I was in Srinagar, the summer capital of the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir.

Flaunting hatred and celebrating jihadi terrorists was once unthinkable in the city referred to by a Mogul king as paradise on earth.

Home to a people of amazing beauty, culture and cuisine, where an Islam once flourished that was bereft of the harshness of the desert.

Where mosques took architectural inspiration from Buddhist pagodas, not from forcibly converted Orthodox Christian churches.

Though the Pakistan-backed insurgency that broke out in 1989-90 has been largely decimated by the Indian Army and the Kashmir government, consequences of the decade-long strife remain.

After all, 40,000 young Kashmiri Muslims died and almost the entire Hindu population of the valley was ethnically cleansed and forced to flee from their ancestral homeland.

The hope of one segment of the population that Kashmir would join Islamic Pakistan seems a forgotten dream.

Read more at Clarion Project

12-Years After 9/11/2001, And 21,564 Jihad Terror Attacks Later, U.S. Policymaking Elites Are Still in Jihad Denial

download (11)by Andrew Bostom:

My Preface to the paperbound 2008 edition of  The Legacy of Jihad, written in late 2007, included this observation:

During mid-November, 2007, a grim milestone was recorded in the macabre tally being kept assiduously in cyberspace by [The Religion of Peace (TROP) website]: the 10,000th attack by jihad terrorists resulting in some 60,000 dead and 90,000 injured since the cataclysmic acts of jihad terrorism on September 11, 2001.

[TROP] does not include combat-related statistics, and he acknowledges that the death toll may increase in the days and months following any given attack (as victims die from their injuries), and this rarely gets reported. His tally also excludes the genocide in Darfur committed by the Islamic government in Sudan, and their marauding jihadist militias (the Janjaweed), whose murderous ravages the UN estimated last year had resulted in some 400,000 dead, and 2 million displaced.

[TROP] identified three episodes of such continuous, mind numbing jihadist carnage which had perhaps unsettled him most: Nadimarg, India (3/23/03), dozens of Hindu villagers roused out of their beds and machine-gunned by Lashkar-e-Toiba; Beslan, Russia (9/3/04), some 350 people slaughtered by jihadists—half of them children; Malatya, Turkey (4/18/07), three Christian Bible distributors bound, tortured for hours, then gruesomely murdered by men who acted explicitly in the name of Islam.

Just under six years later, the rate of carnage having escalated, that gruesometally as of September 10, 2013, was 21,564 attacks. During the recently completed week of August 31 through September 6, 2013, alone, there were 49 jihad terror attacks, including 6 “jihad martyrdom” homicide bombings, resulting in 309 deaths, and 610 critical injuries. Those figures for the entire month of August, 2013, were 260 jihad terror attacks occurring in 25 countries (directed against votaries of 4 non-Muslim “infidel” religions, and also including sectarian Islamic violence between Muslims), causing 161 deaths, and 3412 critical injuries.

The consensus view of orthodox Islamic jurisprudence regarding jihad, since its formulation during the 8th and 9th centuries, through the current era, is that non-Muslims peacefully going about their lives—from the Khaybar farmers whom Muhammad ordered attacked in 628, to those sitting in the World Trade Center on 9/11/01—are “muba’a”, licit,  in the Dar al Harb, lands not yet vanquished by jihad war. As described by the great 20th century scholar of Islamic Law, Joseph Schacht,

A non-Muslim who is not protected by a treaty is called harbi, ‘”n a state of war,” “enemy alien”; his life and property are completely unprotected by law…

And these innocent non-combatants can be killed, and have always been killed, with impunity simply by virtue of being “harbis” during endless razzias and or full scale jihad campaigns that have occurred continuously since the time of Muhammad, through the present. This is the crux of the specific institutionalized religio-political ideology, i.e., jihad, which makes Islamdom’s borders, innards,  and the further reaches of today’s jihadists, “bloody,” to paraphrase the late Samuel Huntington, across the globe.

concluded the updated 2008 Preface to The Legacy of Jihad with these comments, which sadly apply to our policymaking elites with even more uniformity today, September 11, 2013:

Julien Benda in his classic 1928 La Trahison de Clercs (The Treason of the Intellectuals) decried with prophetic accuracy how the abandonment of objective truth abetted totalitarian ideologies, which lead to the cataclysmic destruction of World War II. La Trahison de Clercs of our time remains the nearly complete failure of Western intellectuals to study, understand, and acknowledge the heinous consequences of the living Islamic institution of jihad war.

 

 

Bombing the Buddhists

article-2357933-1AB4F4DA000005DC-926_634x504By Bill Warner:

The jihadists — on this occasion the Indian Mujahadeen – are at it again. On a Sunday in July nine bombs went off in Buddhism’s most sacred place, Bodh Gaya in India. The jihadists said the bombing was in retaliation for the Buddhists resisting jihad in Myanmar. This would be the equivalent of bombing the Wailing Wall, St. Paul’s Cathedral, Bethlehem or the Kabbah. But, since Buddhists are the least political of all religions, the media barely noticed.

0708INDIA-articleLarge

This jihad attack may have long term consequences for jihad, due to favorable attitudes toward and perceptions of Buddhists, and who Buddhists are. Buddhism is the pet religion of the media, Leftists, Progressives and Liberals, and even those who are right of center find it hard to dislike Buddhism. Buddhism is truly the religion of peace, not like that other “religion of peace” with the jihad doctrine and 1400 years of conquest.

But the Left and Liberals are also the apologists for Islam, and one of the ways apologists deny the brutality of Islam is to attack its victims as somehow deserving of the jihadist attacks. When Christians are killed every week by jihadists, the leftist types justify it because of the Crusades and other wars by nations that are primarily Christian. When 30 Christian children are murdered in Nigeria, it is considered payback for the Crusades. (The Crusades lasted for 300 years and the last one was 800 years ago.) And any Jews killed are payback for the purported Israeli persecution of the so-called Palestinians. Put another way, the apologists for Islam figure that most of those who are killed in jihad deserve it.

So, the apologists for Islam are in a quandary. Jihad is hurting Buddhists, but it would be bigoted to complain about it. The denial machine is set to spin — those jihadists were not real Muslims or else they were just a few crazies.

A second problem for the apologists is their theory that if Muslims are treated right, they won’t be violent. This is the “treat the Palestinians right and they will do right” theory of dealing with Islam. This gets expanded to the theory that all Islamic violence is due to how the Palestinians are treated. Well, bombing Buddhists in India has no connection to Palestine.

Many Buddhists are absolute pacifists who hold to the “if you do good, good will come to you” school of politics. The problem is that such Buddhists usually cannot figure out why Muslims believe that being a Buddhist is evil. They may be ignorant of Islamic doctrine that says that the only good that can come out of a Buddhist is submission to Islam.

Buddhist doctrine holds that we need both compassion and wisdom. But the wisdom aspect does not seem to be highlighted when the Dalai Lama says that the attacks are “very sad” while noting that it could be an act of a “few individuals” and “shouldn’t be considered something serious.”

If the Dalai Lama would pick up the clue phone, he would hear this: “Hello, the Buddhism that you practice, Vajrayana Buddhism, came from the Swat Valley in Afghanistan and where is Buddhism now? It has been annihilated from Afghanistan by jihadists. That same doctrine of jihad is annihilating Buddhists in Thailand today. Is that sad enough for you?” Jihad seeks to annihilate all religions in the territory that Muslims enter. And that should be considered as something serious.

But bombing Bodh Gaya has a down side for the jihadists. A few of the usual apologists may decide that if jihad means bombing Buddhists, then maybe, just maybe, there is something fundamentally wrong with Islam. Islam’s apologists have a lot more trouble in justifying the justice of jihad against Buddhists since the jihad is against their own political alliance.

So bombing Buddhists may be a tactical victory, but it could a long-term strategic error but, only if the Buddhists and the apologists pay attention to murder of their own.

Published in American Thinker

Pakistan Bankrolls Terrorist Group

Hafiz Mohammad Saeed

Hafiz Mohammad Saeed

by Mohshin Habib:

“They compete for the religious vote bank.” — Arif Nizami, Pakistani poltical analyst

Pakistan has just allocated over $4,000,000 for a Center, a “Knowledge Park” and other initiatives for the Islamist parent body of the banned terrorist group that attacked Mumbai, India, in 2008.

The Pakistani provincial government of Punjab included in its budget for fiscal 2013-14 a sum of 61.35 million Pakistani Rupees ($616,000 USD) to fund the largest Center of Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD) — the Islamist parent body of the banned terror organization Laskar-e-Taiba (LeT), which committed the Mumbai attacks.

In addition to that allocation for the JuD Center, known as Markaz-e-Taiba, the Pakistani government has also allocated Rs 350 million ($3,500,000 USD) for setting up a “Knowledge Park” and other initiatives at the Center.

A spokesman for the Punjab government defended the gift by saying that the government had taken administrative control of the welfare institutions being run by JuD, in compliance with Security Council resolutions of the United Nations. In December 2008, India formally requested the United Nations to designate JuD a terrorist organization, a request with which the UN Security Council complied. In 2012, the U.S. State Department offered a bounty of $10,000,000 on the head of JuD’s Emir, or chief, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, relating to the Mumbai massacre. The US authority also offered $2 million for information leading to the arrest and conviction of Hafiz Mohammad Saeed’s brother-in-law Abdur Rehman Makki, second in command of LeT. Makki is said to be in close contact with Taliban supreme commander Mullah Omar and Ayman Al-Zawahiri. Ajmal Kassab, accused in the Mumbai attack, is said to have received training at the JuD’s center, Markaz-e-Taiba.

However, a recent report in the Pakistani daily The News said that despite the appointment of an administrator, the Markaz-e-Taiba is effectively in the control of JuD, and that Pakistani and foreign journalists cannot go inside the Center without first obtaining permission from the media cell of the JuD. A source, according to the report, said a few months ago that JuD’s Emir, Hafiz Mohammad Saeed, held a convention at Markaz-e-Taiba, largely attended by JuD activists.

Read more at Gatestone Institute

Also see:

BBC Documentary: Pakistan Double Cross on Terrorism (includes Patrick Poole’s  expose of a 20 year influence operation by the Pakistani ISI that may explain US foreign policy towards Pakistan)

 

Islam’s War of Annihilation Against Hindus

mumbai_india_01071By :

A thought-provoking essay written by Narain Kataria, president of the Indian American Intellectuals Forum, sounds a familiar alarm. “Hinduism Faces Eclipse” reveals that “the anti-Hindu forces within and without India are working in tandem on an insidious mission to destroy our civilization and culture, and obliterate Hinduism from the Indian soil.” Kataria further contends that Indians are not facing terrorism, but worldwide jihad, which he calls a “fully globalized franchise…working overtime to destroy all non-Muslim nations.”

Muslims currently comprise 20 percent of India’s 1.2 billion population, the rest of which is overwhelmingly Hindu. But as Narain points out, Indian Muslims have engaged in a series of attacks on Hindu citizens, temples, religious festivals and unarmed pilgrims. He reminds us that a month after the 9/11 attacks in the United States, a proclamation was issued on Al Jazeera television promising that “Hindu India” would also be targeted for jihad. Two months after that, a suicide squad assaulted India’s Parliament House in New Delhi on December 13, 2001, killing 9 and wounding 18.

Since then thousands of terror attacks have besieged India. The city of Mumbai alone has been terrorized on four separate occasions. On March 12, 1993, 13 separate explosions in various parts of the city killed 257 and wounded more than 700. Most of the terrorists involved received arms and training in Pakistan, and Indian authorities contend the Pakistani intelligence agency, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), was actively involved as well. On July 11, 2006, a series of pressure-cooker bombs exploded on commuter trains, killing 209 and wounding over 700. Once again, the ISI was involved, along with the Pakistani Islamist militant group Lashkar-e-Toiba, and the Students’ Islamic Movement of India, according to Mumbai police. On November 26, 2008, another wave of terror attacks perpetrated by Muslims targeted two luxury hotels, a Jewish center, a tourist restaurant and a crowded train station. Another 166 people were killed and more than 300 were wounded. And on July 13, 2011 three separate bomb blasts killed 26 and injured 130.

As recently as July 2012, riots in the state of Assam initiated by Muslim infiltrators from Bangladesh resulted in at least 74 deaths. Several Hindu women were raped and then chopped into pieces during the attacks.

Kataria blames these and other atrocities on “India’s decadent culture of political correctness and pock-marked ‘taqaiyah’ of ‘paid news,’ when no national leader dare muster the courage to speak truth.” The New York Times echoed that assertion when they covered India’s 2008 election campaign, noting that the nation’s fight against terror is “complicated by a political landscape in which parties vie for Hindu and Muslim voters’ loyalty.” Kataria told FrontPage that the Indian government “doesn’t understand Sharia,” and that the “politicians are afraid of Muslims” because they have organized highly effective political blocs, capable of removing anyone who would even suggest India is under Islamic siege.

The blocs’ ultimate purpose? “Muslims want to finish India as soon as possible,” contends Kataria.

Read more at Front Page

 

Challenging Worldview Clichés

images (20)By Mark Durie:

Over the past decade I have had the opportunity to speak to thousands of people about Islam across five continents.  At question time, the same issues keep coming up.  The questions which have stayed in my mind are all about world view assumptions.  These are key ideas which control the thinking of Western people when they are engaging with Islam.

Over time I have come to recognize some of these beliefs as clichés.  These ideas were once original and even controversial, but over time they have become like mental wallpaper: ever-present, overlooked, comfortingly familiar, and increasingly anachronistic, yet setting the tone.  People so readily process matters of the utmost importance through the grid of trite ‘truisms’ that are in fact easily falsifiable yet comforting falsehoods.

Challenging these clichés is never simple.  It can be as messy as stripping wallpaper.  What is needed is a total strategy to renew people’s souls, by contending for their whole mental outlook, not just individual parts of it.   It is not enough to demonstrate the folly of particular ideas.  What is needed is a total worldview makeover, which enables people to step away from their failing worldview together with its empty clichés.  These clichés are really false beliefs about the world, and to correct them people more than just a few ‘idea transplants’.

People also need hope: to abandon a comforting false idea, unpalatable truths needs to be presented in a way which is not negative, but which empowers and encourages people, giving them practical ways to live positively.

Consider for example the notion that all religions are the same.  This is widely held, but it is easily falsifiable.  Different religions project conflicting ethical standards, and produce very different societies.  What people believe makes a difference to how they choose to live. Examples abound and are easily identified.  India’s caste system is a product of a belief in reincarnation.  Saudi Arabia’s discriminatory treatment of non-Muslims and women is a product of Islamic theology.  The United States’ historic commitment to human equality and freedom have been significantly shaped by Christian theology.

However rejecting religious relativism can be costly, because to do so raises the implication that individuals have a duty to judge between religions.  If religions or their parts can be bad or good, and can harm or hurt societies, then we all surely have a duty to exercise discernment and critical judgement about what is bad and what is good. The prospect of making that judgement can cause intense cognitive dissonance for those who fear they will be rejected as bigots.

In order to cope – to minimize the dissonance – people often partition religious views into two categories: ‘moderate’ views which are ‘reasonable’ and accord with their own ethical prejudices, and ‘extreme’ views which are ‘unreasonable’ and wrong and deserved to be opposed.  Then they can oppose ‘extremist’ religion, while still maintaining the view that all religions are basically the same (if pursued in ‘moderation’).

Read more at Mark Durie’s blog

Mark Durie is an Anglican vicar in Melbourne, Australia, author of The Third Choice, and an Associate Fellow at the Middle Eastern Forum.

(A version of this article was first published in the MST Ambassador Magazine.  See here.)

Paul to Clinton: ‘I would have relieved you of your duty’

c

BY: Washington Free Beacon Staff

RAND PAUL: One of the things that disappointed me most about the original 9/11 was no one was fired. We spent trillions of dollars, but there were a lot of human errors, these are judgment errors, and the people who make judgment errors need to be replaced/fired no longer in charge of making these judgment calls. So we have a review board. The review board finds 64 different things we can change, a lot of them are commonsense and should be done, but the question is it’s a failure of leadership that they were not done in advance and four lives were [lost] because of this. I’m glad that you’re accepting responsibility. I think that ultimately with your leaving you accept responsibility for the worst culpability for the worst tragedy since 9/11. And I really mean that. Had I been president at the time and I found that you did not read the cables from Benghazi, you did read the cables from Ambassador Stevens, I would have relieved you of your post. I think it’s inexcusable. The thing is that, we can understand that you’re not reading every cable. I can understand that maybe you’re not aware of the cable from the ambassador in Vienna that asked for $100,000 for an electrical charging station. I can understand that maybe you’re not aware that your department spent $100,000 on three comedians who went to India on a promotional tour called “Make Chi Not War,” but I think you might be able to understand and might be aware of the $80 million spent on a consulate in Mazar-i-Sharif that will never be built. I think it’s inexcusable that you did not know about this and did not read these cables.

Indian Hindu Rally against Jihad at Consulate: “Save India from Islam”

Pamela Geller:

To the deafening chants of “Save India from Islam,” the Indian Hindu people gathered today on 5th Avenue by the Indian consulate in New York City to protest the relentless jihad against the free and brave nation.

India has long suffered at the hands of jihadists. At least 80million Hindus have been slaughtered in jihadi wars. Centuries of persecution, oppression, genocide.

The history of India is teeming with Muslim monsters such as Timur the  Terrible, who paraphrased the Koran: “‘O prophet, make war against the  infidels and treat them severely.’ My great object in invading  Hindustan (India) had been to wage a religious war against the infidel  Hindus.” And he did. Hundreds of thousands of Hindus were beheaded and towers made of their skulls. The warrior Babur was particularly fond  of raising higher and higher towers of Hindu heads that the Muslims had cut off during and after every battle. He loved to sit in his royal  tent and watch this spectacle. On one such occasion, the ground flowed  with so much blood “and became so filled with quivering carcasses that  his tent had to be moved thrice to a higher level.” (That’s from The Koran and the Kafir, by A. Ghosh.) He only missed the “merit” of demolishing temples and  breaking symbols and images because his predecessor Firuz Tughlak hardly left any for him in the territories he traversed.

The record of jihad in India is extremely and unimaginably bloody. Mahmud  of Ghazni, Mohammed Ghori, Firuz Tughlak, Timur, Muzaffar Shah, Mahmud  Begarha, Mahmud Khalji, Ilyas Shah, Babur, Sher Shah Suri, Akbar the  Great, Jahangir, Shah Jahan, Aurangzib, Abdali, Tipu Sultan,  Siraj-ud-Daula, and so many others all persecuted, humiliated, tortured, terrorized, and slaughtered the Hindus throughout Islamic history in  India.

The war against the infidel in India is monstrous, unremitting, and  constant to the present day. From Mumbai to Kashmir, all over India  north and south, the jihad rages..(more here.)

Go to Atlas Shrugs to read the MEMORANDUM TO THE PRIME MINISTER OF INDIA warning of the dire situation in India

UPDATE: Pamela Hall has great coverage here: Hindus Protest Indian Congress & Sharia Law NYC 5 Ave & 64th St

Muslims Call for Shariah Law in India and Islamic Destruction of Hindu Idols

 By Creeping Sharia:

via Cleric’s Call for Shariah Law and Islamic Destruction of Hindu Idols | IndiaWires. h/t @SanghPariwar

Implementing Sharia law, Islamizing India, destroyig idols of Hindu deities, Fatwa against Indian political parties, and axing Bollywood: the agenda on shariah4hind.com is clear. The website calls for the implementation of these aspects on a gathering scheduled on  3 March, 2012.

The website splashes a slideshow depicting Fatwa against Indian political parties, with pictures of Manmohan Singh, LK Advani, Narendra Modi and Rahul Gandhi displayed on the front page, ostensibly their prime targets. A war cry has been issued calling for the axe to be laid on Bollywood in 2012. The slide show ends with a ‘beheaded’ statue of Lord Shiva, with the warning: Islamic destruction of Indian idols and statues. The website also refers to Father of Indian nation Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi as tyrant Mohandas Gandhi.

The agenda on destruction of idols has been made clear in the website. The site calls Islamic rule of India, before the British conquest as ‘glorious Islamic past’ and makes it clear that ‘large scale projects outlining the destruction of public idols and statues will most likely be enforced’.

The establishment of the shariah in India will ultimately see an end to all public idols and statues. Although non-Muslims (Hindus, Buddhists etc.) will not be prohibited from practising their religion privately, construction of idols and statues (in the public arena) will. As a possible replacement to India’s (public) idols and statues, we envisage the construction of Masjids (mosques)………

The owner of the website is Anjem Choudary, a self styled British based Islamic Cleric.   Through the website, muslims have been exhorted “to establish the Khilafah and rule by the [sharia] laws of God alone”. The designs have been laid thread bare and clear in the About Us section: “fulfil the prophecy of the Messenger Muhammad (saw) i.e. Izhar ud-Deen, the complete domination of the world by Islam”.

Read the rest…

 

Indian court orders Facebook and Google to remove ‘anti-religious’ content

By Anna Edwards at Mail Online:

Social websites including Google and Facebook have been ordered by an Indian court to remove all ‘anti-religious’ and ‘anti-social’ content within six weeks.

On Saturday a Delhi Court ordered 22 social networking sites, including Yahoo and Microsoft, to wipe the objectionable and defamatory contents and file compliance reports by February 6, 2012.

Additional Civil Judge Mukesh Kumar passed the order on a suit filed by Mufti Aijaz Arshad Qasmi seeking to restrain the websites from circulating objectionable and defamatory contents.

Qasmi had objected to a number of images on the websites which he complained would cause ‘irreparable loss and injury to the people who are offended by them’.

He argued that some of the images defamed Hindu gods, Prophet Mohammed and other religious figures, India Today website reported.

The order will raise serious questions about how users’ posts and opinions will be edited, censorship and freedom of expression.

Read the rest at Mail online

Harvard Sells Out Free Speech to Islamic Supremacism

By Pamela Geller at Human Events:

Harvard University has dropped courses on economics taught by a Hindu professor, Subramanian Swamy, president of the Janata Party of India and a former Union Cabinet minister—not because they were poorly taught, or because Swamy advocated discredited economic theories (such as, say, socialism), but because he wrote an editorial last summer that Muslims find offensive.
 
University officials said that Swamy’s editorial was “reprehensible.”  Harvard students formed a group called the Coalition Against Bigotry at Harvard, and demanded that Harvard fire Swamy.  Comparative religion Prof. Diana Eck explained:  “There is a distinction between unpopular and unwelcome political views.”
 
Swamy, however, said that university authorities never even bothered to discuss the matter with him.  “If there was an objection, they should have written to me.”  With his firing, he said, “A dangerous precedent has been enacted.”  That’s true, because when the protests first began, Harvard officials said they were going to keep Swamy on the faculty and defend his right to free speech.
 
The university had initially decided to stand by Swamy, citing principles of free speech.  Harvard’s Faculty Council voted unanimously to keep him on board.  But Swamy’s detractors didn’t give up with that vote:  Philosophy Department Chairman Sean Kelly at first defended the Faculty Council’s decision, but then changed his mind and voted for the removal of Swamy’s courses from Harvard’s offerings.  “I was persuaded,” he said, “that the views expressed in Dr Swamy’s op-ed piece amounted to incitement of violence instead of protected political speech.”
 
Neither Eck nor Kelly nor anyone else, however, bothered to mention that Swamy’s piece was called “How to wipe out Islamic terror,” and that it was written in the context of the Islamic jihad against India.  I ran it on my website AtlasShrugs.com here on July 16, 2011.  Swamy wrote:  “The terrorist blast in Mumbai on July 13, 2011, requires a decisive soul-searching by Hindus of India.  Hindus cannot accept to be killed in this Halal fashion, continuously bleeding every day, till the nation finally collapses.”  He noted that “there are about 40 reported and unreported terrorist attacks per month in the country.  That is why the recent U.S. National Counterterrorism Center publication, ‘A Chronology of International Terrorism,’ states:  ‘India suffered more terrorist acts than any other country.’ ”
 
In light of this fight for India’s very life, Swamy offered a series of strategies for India’s defense.  He even invited Muslims of conscience to join in the defense against the jihad and Islamic supremacism:  “In this response, Muslims of India can join us if they genuinely feel for the Hindu.”
 
Some of Swamy’s recommendations reflect the deep crisis that he sees in India.  He urged that “whatever and however small the terrorist incident, the nation must retaliate—not by measured and ‘sober’ responses, but by massive retaliation.  Otherwise what is the alternative?  Walk meekly to death expecting that our ‘sober’ responses will be rewarded by our neighbors and their patrons?  We will be back to 1100 A.D.,  fooled into suicidal credulity.  We should not be ghouls for punishment from terrorists and their patrons.  We should retaliate.”
 
Accordingly, he recommended that when Islamic jihadists “blast our temples and kill Hindu devotees,” that mosques should also be “removed” as a “tit-for-tat.”  In light of Islamic efforts to “make India into Darul Islam” (that is, the House of Islam, land ruled by Islamic law), Swamy said that India should “implement Uniform Civil Code, make Sanskrit learning compulsory and singing of “Vande Mataram” mandatory, and declare India as Hindu Rashtra in which only those non-Hindus can vote if they proudly acknowledge that their ancestors are Hindus.”
 
People who sincerely believe in human rights and want to defend free societies against the Islamic jihad may disagree that some of Swamy’s recommendations are necessary or appropriate.  But is it not central to this Ivy League university and every institution in these United States to “protect free speech, including that of Dr Swamy and of those who disagree with him”?
 
Where does Harvard address the truth of Swamy’s remarks, or the 80 million Hindus slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements?
 
India, along with Israel, southern Sudan and so many other places, have been the battlefields in endless bloody wars to install a universal caliphate, the objective of the global jihad.
 
Freedom of speech protects all speech, not just the ideas that we like.  That’s the point.  Who decides what’s good and what’s forbidden?  Harvard?  The Islamic supremacists who are seeking to impose the Sharia restriction on free speech?
 
Harvard has been bought and sold to the highest Sharia bidder.  In December 2005, Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal donated $20 million each to Harvard University and Georgetown University to fund Islamic studies.
 
It is dire.  I cannot believe this is America.

Pamela Geller is the publisher of AtlasShrugs.com and the author of  Stop the Islamization of America (WND Books).