Their biggest targets — literally and figuratively — were the two monumental Buddha statues carved out of the sandstone cliffs in central Afghanistan..”

The above line, taken from an article this website has posted on its home page, illustrates by one example a massive difference between the Islamic fundamentalists and the so called Hindu fundamentalists or Hindu nationalists.

Notice how the Taliban simply hate the Buddha statues because they are non-Islamic, and thus desire to destroy them. Not because a brutal, murderous Buddhist conqueror invaded Afghanistan, supplanted a pre-existing Islamic structure with a Buddhist one, and performed other destructive, murderous actions. No, they hated it simply because it exists.

In fact the leadership of the LTTE was primarily Christian, including prabhakaran. The Tamil church is VERY influential in LTTE circles.

Definition of Yindoos Good Yindoos = If they succumb to dhimmitude and pay jijya Bright Yindoos = If they become (sic) secular and hate yindooism Yindoo terrorists = If they attack islamists and EJs( Evanjihadis) Yindoo fascists/Lunatics = If they attack Bright Yindoos.

No, the problems in the North East of India are not comparable, ideologically, to the erstwhile East Pakistan. If tens of thousands have been killed, that’s because the so called uprising is itself rabidly anti-democratic, anti-plural and regressive. These movements, which are not representative of the majority of the people in Assam, Nagaland etc, are against democracy and pluralism. They are not striving toward more freedom, democracy and pluralism( which at least the Bangladeshis did) , rather less, much less. The Indian government and people are right to oppose them.

Why don’t you enlighten us about this “general rule for violence globally” that explains why the Tamil Hindu minority of Sri Lanka resorted to terror against the Buddhist majority and became the original suicide bombers?

The Sri Lanka conflict was NOT a religious conflict, since many Sri Lankan Tamils were Christians (including some members of the LTTE). It was primarily an ethnic/linguistic conflict between the Sinhalese majority and the Tamil minority.

Why don’t you enlighten us about this “general rule for violence globally” that explains why the Tamil Hindu minority of Sri Lanka resorted to terror against the Buddhist majority and became the original suicide bombers? Why Hindu mobs committed pogroms against religious minorities in India? Why untouchable Hindus of India are terrorized, raped and murdered by other Hindus on a daily basis? Why more Muslims have been killed by Muslim terrorists than non-muslims? Why there are politically motivated terrorists such as the right wing Norwegian who bombed Oslo and shot almost a hundred teenagers just a few hours ago?

The fact that you are so sure that only Muslims commit violence is proof of your unbelievable stupidity, willful ignorance and shameless deceit. Such lack of intelligence, character and ignorance of history is something that is found to be common in all religious fundamentalists: Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Jew…

The people of Bangladesh, formerly East Pakistan, waged an essential progressive struggle for liberation, from the hands of the militarist, Islamist Punjabis. The situation and ideology was not the same as a few Northeasterns desiring to be independent from India.

Yeah right there are just a “few” north easterners, Kashmiris, tribals struggling for liberation from India’s “accommodating” rule; which is why 100s of thousands of soldiers are deployed to keep them in check, and tens of thousands of them have been killed! This is just another example of your laughable stupidity and dishonesty. So, why are their grievances less valid than that of the bangladeshis just because India is a democracy?

http://globiansperspective.blogspot.com/2011/07/how-can-india-tackle-terrorism-from.html