Georges Fernandez

Submitted by Sword of Islam & The Babies of Beslan (United Kingdom), Sep 3, 2006 at 19:09

"Indians hardly need the "advice" of the British in coping with the Islamist problem in their midst"

I agree completely. That's why we don't offer it. Kindly explain it to Swaminathan who appears to resent the fact the British and US haven't resolved the problem on your behalf.

However I must confess confusion vis-a-vis the British affiliations with Pakistan and India respectively. Where did the Muslims that we imported to India originally come from? It seems like rather a lot of them to imported by the Raj according to your logic. Unless, of course, they were already there and treated as a sub-species just as African Americans were in 50's America. I can see why this equality would have been resented by you at the time as we all know that the Indian caste system is the very apogee of racist doctrine. Not content to classify people as White, Black and Brown you actually developed a system where people are classified using a spectrum of shades of brown! Of course you resent the fact that this didn't sit well with your British masters. In the long run you were proven right of course but then giving half of your country away to them is probably the biggest global encouragement of the growth of Islam that the world has ever seen.

Most of the Pakistani Muslim militants whom I have encountered on this board are of the firm opinion that that Indian Hindus are historically British 'lackeys' and that Muslims alone forced the British out of India while you offer an illuminating insight into the fact that the British are Pakistani lackeys. I'm glad to see that you agree with them on something. I'm also glad to hear that India has Muslim terrorism under such firm control and that they are are far less active in Indian soil than they are on British. This obviously means that you have had fewer terrorist attacks on your soil than we have. Doesn't it? I should certainly hope that you have this peaceful status given the fact that you had to surrender half of your country to buy it. Assasinated any more Gandhis recently?

Submitted by Georges Fernandez, Sep 3, 2006 at 00:59

"Then the tide began to turn, and they had to get rid of a popular 'Princess' once she started serial affairs with Muslims! "

Serial affairs with Muslims? Name more than one.

I might have taken you more seriously had I not read this. Only a half-wit would believe that Princess Diana was 'taken out' because she was the ex-wife of the Prince of Wales and had a millionaire Muslim boyfriend. That particular conspiracy theory was started and has been funded by a Muslim (Al-Fayed) who hates the fact that he was partially responsible for the sequence of events that led to her death and that the British refuse to grant him British citizenship. Most of his claims have been proven to be outright lies.

Even if it was true it would imply that the British take the Muslim threat very seriously. So what is your point? Get an education and stop recycling arguments that wouldn't phase a ten-year old.

The same stunted mentality that believes such garbage is clearly the same kind of red-neck mentality that believes that the planes that flew into the Twin Towers were empty and piloted by Mossad agents by remote control. Get a grip.

I think that you must be secretly Muslim as you seem to agree with them on so many issues....

Submitted by Georges Fernandez, Sep 3, 2006 at 00:59

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".