Lot of questions came to my mind after reading this article in hindustan times http://www.hindustantimes.com/StoryPage/StoryPage.aspx?sectionName=HomePage&id=6e16ba65-2bab-4dbe-80e1-c809b7e89ba3&&Headline=Explaining+away+terror

My “counter point” is that Mr. Vir Sanghvi very rightly pointed out that we should start talking about more urgent issues like Gaza attacks and carry on the investigations of Mumbai attacks along with it.
With so many movements being carried out in India no one can deny a complete absence of local elements in Mumbai blasts but yes why Muslims in Gaza, Palestine, Kashmir and in Frontier areas of Pakistan are frustrated after being terrorised by huge and strong oppressors? This is a question which needs to be answered.
Lets accept that Ajmal Kasab is a Pakistani “brainwashed”. But why by some jihadi elements and not by Indian intelligence agencies? Jihad does not mean killing innocent people and you should not talk of “terrorism” and “jihad” in the same breath. They are NOT the same. I am amazed at the frequency and ease with which you use word “jihad” in terms of terrorism when you are pretending to be an advocate of Indian muslims! You are hurting and tarnishing the image of Islam.
Mr Vir writes “When Pakistani politicians go on TV and say that the terror strikes were indigenous, they are — in effect — saying that Indian Muslims are terrorists, something that no responsible Indian politician would ever consider saying”.
Why Indian muslims? Why not any human being without the discrimination of religion. This is how you people give the message of hatred and spread it. Thinking ill about Pakistan is a way of life for Indian media but we, the people of Pakistan wish Indians all the best and are with them in their time of sorrow. Lets see who goes deeper and deeper in chaos.

Please read this link below and you will get the response of Indian muslims too.
http://indianmuslims.in/letter-to-mr-vir-sanghvi-and-hindustan-times/

VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
VN:F [1.8.4_1055]
Rating: 0 (from 0 votes)