True, I agree, the Gulf dictatorships are also one of the part of this grand design. They don’t even think about democracy due to the type of protection they recieve from the world powers. They don’t care about human rights and they don’t keep any powerful opposition strong enough to question them on their wasteful ways of living and their wrongdoings.

SI:Hopefully, blogs like this will strike the middle ground

That’s why I still keep on voicing my opinions and thoughts and try to give a another side to the story to a subject that you discuss in your blog.

Thanks for being in the middle.

As long as a group is alligned with any govt. according to their designs and plans, they don’t label/brand anyone as a terrorist. The moment they feel it works against them, they have all the means and the mechanisms to brand the antagonists as terrorists with the support and the backing of powerful nations. These powerful nations were once invaders and still they have this ambition very much active in their programs. Without the support and the backing and the initiation, no other could brand anyone being a Terrorist.

It should have the full recognition by these powers on the basis of their “Interests” (in simple terms – Their profits) and the propaganda by their media to back their govts. interests (Profits). Without these elements and it’s originators nobody could even utter the word against another saying “a terrorist”. They have the ultimate weapons to subjugate anybody to fall in line in order that they profit by any means, even if it infringes on human rights.

Humanity has no place in this. Blind followers and their skewed philosophy is another solace to these powers to gain more and more profits through destructions and murder. Nobody questions the other side due to weaknesses.

Following link could help in some way to realize this factor:

Can there be any doubt who the real terrorists are?

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/newsfull.php?newid=198480

“According to the U.S.’s own definition of terrorism Israel is squarely in the frame. Under Section 3 of Executive Order 13224 “Blocking Property and prohibiting Transactions with Persons who commit, threaten to commit, or support Terrorism”, the term “terrorism” means an activity that…
(i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and
(ii) appears to be intended
• to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
• to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
• to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking. ”

SearchIndia.com Responds:

1. The first four paragraphs of your comment seems to tacitly hold the U.S. responsible generally.

But the Gulf Dictatorships oops Gulf Nations are no saints.

2. If the western media is Bill O’Reilly, then Al Jazeera is the equivalent of Rachel Maddow. They are the mirror reflections.

Hopefully, blogs like this will strike the middle ground.

SearchIndia.com Responds:

1. You write above: this guy seems to be anti-islamic…..I feel terrorism started in Islam because a few control freaks (on the lines of hitler) who were born turned out to be Muslims….it could have happened to any religion….look at the christians of the dark ages,with all those wars against muslims and jews, as well as witch burnings and all …..hindus are not far behind,with the gujarat carnage and all the hindu-muslim riots…..

We ought to look at behavior of religions on a time dimension. Muslims, and to a lesser extent Hindus, are more militant now. Christians were overtly militant in centuries past.

2. You write above: look at the christians of the dark ages,with all those wars against muslims and jews, as well as witch burnings

Lately, we’ve been doing some reading on the witch burning and its inspiration Malleus Maleficarum. Horrendous beyond description.

Some estimates of those killed in the witch trials put the number at 60,000.

3. There have been some respected political scientists outside the U.S. like the Italian political scientist Giovanni Sartori but you are right the best ones lately have come from the U.S.

4. Yiu write: Amartya Sen is an economist right? well he’s done well for himself….but only after moving to harvard…..

Wrong. Amartya Sen was highly regarded even before his Harvard days.

Overall, Amartya Sen has spent more time in the U.K. (at Oxford, Cambridge & LSE) than at Harvard.