Since 9/11 President Bush has been engaged in a cover-up in regards to Islam using the Sociologists framework of Multiculturalism to equate it to Christianity. Going along with that very dangerous idea are various right of center bloggers who don't seem able to question anything the President does. That these bloggers wield an enormous influence over the blogsphere is tragic since in the absence of a valid opposition party in the United States we are left with a single view of our enemy. A view that increasingly shows its contradictions with each crack exposing more of the nightmare below the surface, a nightmare none of us want to face but that whether we will or not we must face.

One part of that nightmare for the Hindus is the genocide in the Hindu Kush mountains where millions of Hindus were murdered by invading Muslims. Not sure there Captain but that might be a fairly good explanation of why the Indians hate the Muslims so much. I know thats an uncomfortable thought for people like you and Hugh Hewitt but the fact remains the same. Islam has bloody borders. I attach a little piece about the terror of the Hindu Kush mountains.
However, other historians argue that there is another meaning to the "Hindu Kush," since Indian Killer cannot be the translation because the invading Muslim Persians refer to India asHindustan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India) or "The Land of Hindus."

There are historical implications with respect to the Islamic invasion of Hindustan. In other parts of Asia and Europe, the conquered nations quickly opted for conversion to Islam rather than death. But in India, because of the staunch resistance of the 4000 year old Hindu faith, the Muslim conquests were for the Hindus a pure struggle between life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and their populations massacred. Each successive campaign brought hundreds of thousands of victims and similar numbers were deported as slaves. Every new invader made often literally his hill of Hindu skulls. Thus the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000, was followed by the annihilation of the entire Hindu population there; indeed, the region is still called Hindu Kush, 'Hindu slaughter'. The Bahmani sultans in central India, made it a rule to kill 100.000 Hindus a year. In 1399, Teimur killed 100.000 Hindus IN A SINGLE DAY, and many more on other occasions. Koenraad Elst quotes Professor K.S. Lal's "Growth of Muslim population in India", who writes that according to his calculations, the Hindu population decreased by 8O million between the year 1000 and 1525.
Wow I think the Indians might still be a bit pissed off about the actions of the religion of peace, Ya think? Hey Hugh Hewitt these facts uncomfortable for you?

Captain's Quarters: "So why plot to attack India -- a plot only subverted by the failure of the 'courage' of the terrorists assigned to strike it? India has a long history of Hindu-Muslim tension. Pakistan and Bangladesh owe their existence to a British partition of the Asian subcontinent when it pulled out in 1947. Ever since the split and massive relocations in the period that followed, the mainly Hindu India has disputed the borders it shares with Muslim Pakistan, which resulted in a nuclear standoff not long before 2001. Both nations claim the Kashmir province, and radicals on both sides provoked both governments into several bouts of brinksmanship."

UPDATE: Captain responds in my comments section. To be clear I respect the work that the Captain has done tremendously. I just might be on the otherside of this issue from him though after some clarifications we might actually be closer than I think. Here is his post and my response copied from the comments section.

You completely misinterpreted my post. I understand the historical animus between Islamists and Hindus. What I'm saying is that al-Qaeda isn't picking its targets based on Western "occupation" of Arabic lands. It's picking targets based on their intense hatreds regardless of American actions in the area.
Captain Ed | Email | Homepage | 07.25.05 - 11:38 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I respect your blog tremendously and have for quite a long time. But since Rep Tancredo's remarks I have begun to wonder if even on the supposedly rational right of center of blogs there isnt a bit of wishful thinking going on. Thinking that the war is merely between Al Queda and the rest of us is mistaken. There are far more players on the enemies side than one mere rather beat up terrorist organization. Shall we count all the Imams who give morale support each and everday? And what about all the madrassas funded by our "ally" Saudia Arabia the same people that President Bush literally held hands with not so long ago. I am disturbed that in the absence of a legitimate opposition party we have absolutely no means to question the view of our enemy that the Administration holds to that I believe is fatally flawed. I admit that this view might be a lot more realistic in private but then again the white glove treatment of the koran in Gitmo may show otherwise.

This is exceedingly dangerous and it is one of the reasons I absolutely welcomed Rep Tancredos remarks.

Reference Article