Things “Police Blotter Bob” Won’t Tell You… (Vol. 2)

In 2007, there were a series of attacks in India against Muslim targets that were widely suspected to be the work of Muslim militants. That’s not very surprising, as Muslim terrorists are not above attacking other Muslims. This is well known. But, as “Police Blotter Bob” never fails to point out, the bomb attacks were blamed on Muslims.

Yet, recent revelations show that a Hindu holy man was actually behind the attacks:

An Indian court has remanded in custody a Hindu holy man accused of a string of bomb attacks previously thought to be the work of Muslim militants.

Swami Aseemanand allegedly admitted to placing bombs on a train to Pakistan, at a Sufi shrine and at a mosque.

He has also allegedly confessed to carrying out two assaults on the southern Indian town of Malegaon, which has a large Muslim population.

He has been remanded in custody for the four attacks until 27 January.

Headway

Police say that Mr Aseemanand gave them details of his role in the mosque attack in the city of Hyderabad in 2007 in addition to attacks on a graveyard in Malegaon and a Sufi shrine in Ajmer.

Several Muslim men were arrested for those attacks – and some reports said that they had been tortured. Most are still in custody.

Mr Aseemanand was arrested in November after being in hiding for two years, police said.

According to India’s Tehelka magazine, which has obtained a copy of his 42-page confession, he told his interrogators that the attacks on Muslim places were in response to attacks by Islamist militants in India.

It quotes him as saying that many of those involved in the bombings were members of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) – the right-wing parent organisation of India’s main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party.

The bomb attack on the Samjhauta (Compromise) Express train travelling from India to Pakistan in February 2007 killed 68 people. Many of the passengers who died in the incident were Pakistanis returning home.

The 2008 blast in the town of Malegaon killed seven people and left more than 100 injured. A female Hindu priest, Sadhwi Pragya Singh Thakur, and a serving Indian army officer were among 11 people who were arrested in connection with the attack.

In May 2007, at least 14 people were killed in an explosion during Friday prayers at the Mecca mosque in Hyderabad. It is one of India’s biggest mosques, and there was rioting afterwards.

And in October 2007, a bomb attack on a famous Sufi Muslim shrine in the city of Ajmer – in the state of Rajasthan – killed two people.

Anger over leaks

Most of these blasts were initially blamed on local militant groups and several Muslim men were arrested for alleged involvement.

But correspondents say the police were unable to make much headway in their investigations.

Opposition politicians were angered recently after leaked diplomatic cables suggested Rahul Gandhi, widely tipped as a future Indian PM, believed Hindu radicals might pose a greater threat than Islamist militants.

According to Wikileaks, Mr Gandhi told a US envoy last year there was some support among Indian Muslims for militants such as Lashkar-e-Taiba.

But he told ambassador Timothy Roemer the greater threat could come from the growth of radical Hindu groups.

Let’s say that last part again, shall we: according to Wikileaks, a prominent Indian politician, Rahul Gandhi, told U.S. officials:

Mr Gandhi told a US envoy last year there was some support among Indian Muslims for militants such as Lashkar-e-Taiba. But he told ambassador Timothy Roemer the greater threat could come from the growth of radical Hindu groups.

Wow! There are people who actually believe there can be non-Muslims who are terrorists! Wait a second…Mr. Gandhi must be a secret “dhimmi,” right? He must be practicing Taqiyya! He must be secretly Muslim, seeking to confuse and confund all of us.

Will “Police Blotter Bob” issue a retraction?  I mean, he will likely say (innocently) that he was merely repeating the  news of the day about those attacks. But now that the truth has come out, will he correct the record?

Don’t hold your breath…I’m not holding mine.

13 thoughts on “Things “Police Blotter Bob” Won’t Tell You… (Vol. 2)

  1. “Will “Police Blotter Bob” issue a retraction?  I mean, he will likely say (innocently) that he was merely repeating the  news of the day about those attacks. But now that the truth has come out, will he correct the record?”

    No. Unless he reads this article and will only issue a retraction to make SpencerWatch look bad. But, looking at what he has done in the past, with the Christian on the Malta flight or the fake mass child wedding in Gaza, he’ll probably just delete it and move on.

  2. Kind of slow around here, eh? What’s wrong, having trouble cherry-picking amongst Spencer’s output?

    It’s funny how you spend all your time accusing him of “police blotting” when that is exactly what this site is doing. Why no mention of the many valid points that Spencer is making? Why only post the arguments that you can redirect onto Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims? Or is he just wrong, wrong, wrong on all counts?

    IslamOnline, the 6th most popular Islamic website, recently made the claim that girls who are old enough to menstruate are fair game for Muslims. They must be following Muhammad’s example with Aisha.

    Meanwhile in the civilized world, we’re not busy arguing over whether it is OK to rape children (and yes, having sex with a child who is not mature enough to understand sex is rape… sorry to burst your bubble.) I’m sure pedophiles would love the religion of Islam. If they believe God endorses child sex, what could be more reassuring?

    • He’s back!

      “Why no mention of the many valid points that Spencer is making?”

      The site has refuted his points numerous times. Spencer cannot answer back any of the points. When he tried to, he failed miserably.

      And you make assumptions based on the title and dismiss the rebuttals altogether.

      For example, taqiyya:

      http://spencerwatch.com/2010/08/15/silencing-spencer-taqiyya-and-kitman-are-part-of-judeo-christian-belief/

      If you just read the title then you’re going to be thinking that Loonwatch has redirected the arguments onto “Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims”. But too bad you’re too lazy to read it.

      “IslamOnline, the 6th most popular Islamic website, recently made the claim that girls who are old enough to menstruate are fair game for Muslims. They must be following Muhammad’s example with Aisha.”

      Oh please. Just checked this up on JW. It seems this “Translating Jihad” site has been going around selectively picking out parts from the “fatwa” and translating it as it wishes, knowing well that most Islamophobes and Muslims don’t speak Arabic so can’t respond.

      JihadBob got pwned on Loonwatch where he brought up the “Muslims can’t drive Christians to Churches” “fatwa”, also found on the same site. The whole ‘fatwa’ was translated by Dawood and it was interesting to see how “Translating Jihad” actually missed out the second half of it.

      Anyway, these e-fatwa sites aren’t really the best thing to follow. Askmoses (a Jewish equivalent) says that “technically speaking, a girl may be betrothed the moment she is born, and married at the age of three. A boy may betroth and marry at the age of thirteen.” But then makes the obvious point that most Jews don’t really follow it in modern times. Seems fair enough to me. No reason for me to turn into an anti-semite and make a random connection between the law and the marriage of Isaac and Rebecca.

      Same with Muslim countries. Many Muslim countries have a very high age of consent. It is also interesting to note that the campaign to abolish child marriages in India was helped by the famous Muslim lawyer and founder of Pakistan, Muhammad Ali Jinnah.

      Things have changed in many Muslim countries and are currently changing even in more conservative (fundamentalist?) countries. Saudi Arabia is a good example. Mohsen al-Obaikan, a prominent Islamic scholar and advisor to the King, has proposed that girls below the age of 18 should be forbidden to marry, to prevent the abuse that can happen in these marriages.

      This raises problems for the poorer members of society. Who have to marry off their daughters early because they cannot afford to raise them and the husband can look after them. Nonetheless, cases of child marriages against the child’s will have made scholars change their minds. Thankfully.

      “There is no Shari`ah ruling against specifying the marriage age for girls,” said Dr. Saud Al-Fenesyan, a former rector of the Shari`ah Faculty in the Imam Muhammed bin Saud University.

      Interesting how I am finding out about the ongoing campaign by women and Saudi scholars to abolish child marriages on the same website you claim the “fatwa” was found. Obviously Translating Jihad is hiding bits of the fatwa, as shown by the multiple “…” it uses.

      But evidently, the fatwas of Islamic scholars who don’t write on the internet and are more respected have declared there is nothing wrong in setting a minimum age for marriage. Hence Muslim countries have minimum ages for marriage.

    • “Meanwhile in the civilized world, we’re not busy arguing over whether it is OK to rape children ”

      Actually you are.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association

      “The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) is a pedophile and pedarasty advocacy organization in the United States that works to abolish age of consent laws decriminalizing adult sexual contact with minors,[2][3] and for the release of all men who have been jailed for sexual contacts with minors that did not involve coercion.”

      Also, numerous groups are calling for the age of consent to be lowered to 12, in the belief that children by age 12 are able to make informed decisions about sex. Some groups such as the “Communist Party of Great Britain” wanted to abolish age of consent laws completely, believing that it is against people’s rights if it is consensual. Then could do whatever they like as long as it isn’t abusive. The British group Liberty would also like age of consent laws abolished but has proposed it to be lowered to 14 “as a compromise with public attitudes”.

      Interesting.

  3. Anhi:

    It’s funny how you spend all your time accusing him of “police blotting” when that is exactly what this site is doing. Why no mention of the many valid points that Spencer is making? Why only post the arguments that you can redirect onto Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims? Or is he just wrong, wrong, wrong on all counts?

    I would support Spencer is he wasn’t demonizing my religion and all 1.57 billion of my fellow Muslims. Thus, I agree with Danios when he writes:

    “As I said to you before, if JihadWatch was only criticizing extremist Muslims, I would support the site. But that site is demonizing the Muslim community and the Islamic faith itself. Do you deny this? Can you deny it with a straight face?”

    Speaking of “Translating Jihad”, the site apparently disabled its comments section after two Loonwatchers posted a rebuttal exposing site’s the dishonest “translations”. This is proof enough that Islamophobes aren’t interested in truth or justice of any kind.

    http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/01/spencer-distorts-egyptian-society-spreads-interfaith-bigotry/#comment-51871

  4. Oh look. Everybody’s least favorite troll is back when he realizes that it might be some time before another article is published…for him to spam some more of course.

    Come on everyone, let’s take a fatwa from the “6th most popular Islamic website”…and project it onto the world’s 1.6 billion Muslims! Because evidently doing the same with a picture of 1 woman holding an anti-semitic sign isn’t doing it for us.

  5. Kind of slow around here, eh? What’s wrong, having trouble cherry-picking amongst Spencer’s output?

    Loonwatch’s output is heavier than Spencerwatch’s. Spencer also, in pretty much all of his blog posts, repeats debunked claims that have proven false (e.g. he claims that the Pact of Umar is intrinsic to Islamic law). Anyways, I think Loonwatch et al. should do something about Spencer’s recent claim that the Serbians were the main victims of the Bosnian War whilst the Muslims (i.e. Bosniaks and Albanians) were more culpable in regards to war crimes. The fact that he makes such a blatantly false claim should create doubts in some of his less brainwashed followers. Here’s a nice overview of the some of the late 20th century’s biggest war criminals that Spencer adores.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Srebrenica_massacre#Rapes_and_Abuse_of_Civilians

    Do you know why Bob Spencer is so sympathetic to the Serbian nationalist cause (clue: they killed lots of Muzzies).

    PS: In tradtional Jewish law, Halakha, a girl is allowed to get married at the age of 3. But then again, both Muslims and Jews (at least most off them) marry much later in life nowadays.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *