Rusty Shackleford wrote in WorldNetDaily Two days after the Mumbai bombings last week that killed more than 180, the government of India issued a directive banning 17 websites. These websites were singled out because, according to the Indian government, they might incite religious violence. The nine American websites banned by India are all critical of the Islamist movement. Not a single website of Islamic extremists justifying and even celebrating the Mumbai bombings has been banned.
That is because the Indian Government is afraid of its Muslim population.Why did India ban these websites? And what is the larger meaning of this action? As proprietor of one of the banned websites, I am in a unique position to answer those questions.
The short answer to the first question is that we offended Islamists, and India is afraid of its own Muslim citizens. The short answer to the second question is that liberty may not be able to exist where there are large populations of Muslims.
At least not Radical Islamofascists.
2 comments:
I believe that what the US is doing is going to make the Middle East better in the end.
The people are starting to question their oppressive governments. They see free people in other countries, they are angry that their government does nothing to make their lives better, and at some point they are not going to take it anymore.
There is much more democracy and hope in the Middle East due to what America has done in the Last 5 years than all the years of "talking" and "diplomacy" could do.
It seems that as long as radical Islam is apart of the Middle East, things will be bad. I don't think there is ANYTHING ANYONE can do to completely get rid of that...so things will NEVER be as good as we want them to be...but if we can get enough people to start believing it is possible to have a better life....maybe things can change a bit for the better...
You are right, the radical islamists will always be trying to cause toruble, but I agree that GWB has done more to help things in the last 5 years than was done in the past 50.
Post a Comment