India-US Strategic News and Discussion

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 20 Jul 2012 01:01

darshhan wrote:...

These thugs fit the definition of ****. So what is the problem ?

The problem is that the black people don't like that word and feel it is a racist term. Doesn't matter who says it. it is not about whites in US having to be PC. If you call a black man with that word, he would be offended. You are not shouldering the blame by not using the word. you are just insulting the blacks, for they feel insulted whenever a non-black person uses that word.

member_22872 · Post by **member_22872** » 20 Jul 2012 01:03

What I would like to see our Govt or Media tell us is:
1. Where are the UAE & USN with their investigation ?
(I would have liked to know about our investigation too, but we don't have one).
2. Are both versions consistent, if not, where are the differences and how do they differ from what we heard the Indian crew say.
3. Therefore: What went wrong, why, who screwed up and are they compensating the crew and what can be done better next time.

There is an anecdote about Buddha's disciple asking him if :
1. God exists?
2. God exists does atman too exists?
3. Atman exists, then does it mean God and atman are the same
4...
5...
6....

Buddha then narrates a story which I don't want tell it now as it only make my post longer, so suffice it to say Buddha then says, all the above questions are irrelevant when it comes to self realization, when the aim of existence is to remove pain and suffering. Your questions fall in that category. Knowing the answers to your above questions to what end?
The only question to ask is if USN warned or not, if not the hell with them. We have come to know Headley was a double or triple agent, and US knew about it long back and then what happened? and you want to investigate another case now?

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 20 Jul 2012 01:13

darshhan wrote:
Johann , No need to be shocked. You have seen right. It is "300 *****".

You see I am not an American citizen, don't stay in America and I am not dependent on America for my livelihood. So why the hell should I be required to conform to American standards wrt Political Correctness. By no means I am obliged to follow US paradigms. The real issue is that americans follow these standards to lessen their guilts resulting from a long history of slavery followed by Jim Crow laws which were used to suppress Negroes. Well I did not enslave anyone and neither did I discriminate against anyone. Hence I should not be required to shoulder this burden.

These thugs fit the definition of ***** . So what is the problem ?

This has nothing to do with America. I'm not American either.

It is not acceptable language in decent company anywhere, whether in Nigeria or New Zealand. Unless you are black yourself, it is considered a term of hate speech.

There is no other reason to use that particular word other than to signal that one has a larger problem with black people. That is certainly how most black people anywhere in the world will take it, regardless of your particular colour or nationality.

Its the same thing with using traditional forms of hate speech against any other group.

Please don't damage the reputation of the forum.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:16

putnanja wrote:
darshhan wrote:...

These thugs fit the definition of ***. So what is the problem ?
The problem is that the black people don't like that word and feel it is a racist term. Doesn't matter who says it. it is not about whites in US having to be PC. If you call a black man with that word, he would be offended. You are not shouldering the blame by not using the word. you are just insulting the blacks, for they feel insulted whenever a non-black person uses that word.

Putnanja ji , In my opinion what you are saying is a sign of Dhimmification(Do not take it personally). I have never seen a black person being so sensitive about an Indian. They do not give shit about Indians at all. Need I remind you how many Bright Indian Kids have been murdered in US by blacks. I did not see blacks launching a protest for those murdered Indian kids. Plus I have also seen blacks who are extremely racist against Indians/chinese/asians. They themselves use words like crackers/chinks etc. To give you a reality check, just check what any Indian who owns a grocery store in US thinks about Blacks.

Then why should we be bending backwards to accomodate them. It seems while previously a lot of Indians were Gungadins only wrt White community , now they have become Gungadins wrt Blacks also.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:20

Johann wrote: This has nothing to do with America. I'm not American either.

It is not acceptable language in decent company anywhere, whether in Nigeria or New Zealand. Unless you are black yourself, it is considered a term of hate speech.

When I am in those countries I will speak accordingly. In India no body gives a damn about this word.And you are free to think whatever you like. By your saying I will not become a racist.

If moderators require , I will not use "****" term further. But I would request them as well as other BRFites not to follow American standards of Political Correctness. Far too long we have been looking upto America. It is time we did our own thing even if it is wrong.

sudarshan · Post by **sudarshan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:29

Johann wrote: This has nothing to do with America. I'm not American either.

It is not acceptable language in decent company anywhere, whether in Nigeria or New Zealand. Unless you are black yourself, it is considered a term of hate speech.

There is no other reason to use that particular word other than to signal that one has a larger problem with black people. That is certainly how most black people anywhere in the world will take it, regardless of your particular colour or nationality.

Its the same thing with using traditional forms of hate speech against any other group.

Please don't damage the reputation of the forum.

Most Indians in India don't even realize that there's an issue with the N word. They happily use it. FOTB Indians in the USA have to be warned that using the word is an invitation for a punch in the face. Especially older gen Indians, like parents of students studying in the USA - when they visit the USA, *repeated* warnings are required. Indians simply see nothing offensive in the word - we kind of feel that we are blacks ourselves, I guess.

I don't use the word, because the blacks in the USA don't see things my way. If the blacks feel offended by it, then it's not nice to refer to them that way, is what I feel.

OT, but many Indians in India don't know what the "holocaust" is, either. They actually have a lot of sympathy for Hitler, 'coz he was the guy who nearly brought the British empire to its knees. It took me a while after I came to the USA, before I figured out that the "holocaust" referred to what Hitler did to the Jews. Then I went - "OMG, he did *that?* Maybe he wasn't such a great dude after all." Previously, I always thought it referred to the nuclear holocaust unleashed on Japan by the USA. Liberal education rocks, right? We keep whitewashing Islamic and British rule in India. I think this could in some sense be a side-effect of liberal whitewashing.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 20 Jul 2012 01:31

>> but many Indians in India don't know what the "holocaust" is, either.

I am surprised to hear that. The killing of 6 million jews is in the NCERT history books.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:36

It is truly interesting how some people are making a big issue of how these 300 criminals are labeled. Wonders of Political Correctness.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Jul 2012 01:39

darshhan wrote:It is truly interesting how some people are making a big issue of how these 300 criminals are labeled. Wonders of Political Correctness.

What is more interesting is why you chose to modify the original Youtube video title which said "300 Black Teens". You must have had a reason. Right?

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:39

Check out the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBMHPvph ... re=related

Judging by the comments even the politically correct americans(so racist) are enjoying this song

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 01:40

nachiket wrote:
darshhan wrote:It is truly interesting how some people are making a big issue of how these 300 criminals are labeled. Wonders of Political Correctness.
What is more interesting is why you chose to modify the original Youtube video title which said "300 Black Teens". You must have had a reason. Right?

What can I say ? My secret is out. I am a racist. So sorry.

Interesting to see America Rakshaks come out in force.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 20 Jul 2012 01:42

Let us move on. Let it go.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 20 Jul 2012 01:45

darshhan wrote:
Interesting to see America Rakshaks come out in force.

So since I questioned your motives for using a term which Black people in America consider racist, I am an America Rakshak. Flawless logic.

putnanja · Post by **putnanja** » 20 Jul 2012 01:49

darshhan wrote: Putnanja ji , In my opinion what you are saying is a sign of Dhimmification(Do not take it personally). I have never seen a black person being so sensitive about an Indian. They do not give shit about Indians at all. Need I remind you how many Bright Indian Kids have been murdered in US by blacks. I did not see blacks launching a protest for those murdered Indian kids. Plus I have also seen blacks who are extremely racist against Indians/chinese/asians. They themselves use words like *deleted* etc. To give you a reality check, just check what any Indian who owns a grocery store in US thinks about Blacks.

Then why should we be bending backwards to accomodate them. It seems while previously a lot of Indians were Gungadins only wrt White community , now they have become Gungadins wrt Blacks also.

er, how can giving respect to someone be considered "dhimmification"? I have worked with Blacks, and I would say that majority of them are offended when someone other than blacks use that word. They take it very personally as it has slavery background. Doesn't matter who says it. Blacks use the term only among themselves.

I have some hindi speaking friends who use the term "bhen c****" referring to each other in casual conversation. Doesn't mean anyone can call them that in any context.

No one, not blacks, chinese or anyone else for that matter cares about Indians. Indians have been murdered by both blacks and whites in US. Generalizing it to every black person is shooting ourselves in the foot. There are bad apples in all communities.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Jul 2012 01:50

ELMO=Enough, Lets Move On.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 20 Jul 2012 01:56

I'd like the mods to put an official fatwa on that term.

This is an open forum, accessible to the entire world on Google.

It is to the forums benefit that admins make it clear in the same thread that they do not condone or accept this kind of racially abusive language.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 02:01

^^ I would recommend otherwise. This is not an American security forum and we should be under no obligation to follow American standards of political correctness. Johaan probably does not understand Indian mindset. Indians say a lot of things but that do not mean they are racist. And we shouldn't be burdened with sharing the guilt complex that most whites do. We never enslaved blacks and we did not segregate them.

By the way how many Americans ever respect Indian sensitivities . US navy certainly does not when it comes to Indian fishermen and sponsoring Pakis. My last post in this regard.

Raman · Post by **Raman** » 20 Jul 2012 02:13

It has nothing to do with political correctness or American security fora - it is a matter of basic human decency that you do not refer to a people in racial terms that they find extremely offensive, and digs into very deep scars in their history. I don't recommend that you refer to Arabs as sand-niggers, or Indians as dot-heads either. If you don't understand this fundamental issue, I submit you have a problem.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 20 Jul 2012 02:15

Darshhan, Please stop using the word. Its demeaning and hurts peoples feelings. Again all dont use that word.
Will delete all those posts in a little while.

ramana

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 20 Jul 2012 02:23

I have deleted it in every post where I could find it.

Darshhan, the usage of deliberately derogatory terms for people is not acceptable. Once more, and you will be banned permanently by me. Further, nonsense like accusing members of the forum of "dhimmification" and "American Rakshaks" just because they don't agree with you is also frowned upon.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 20 Jul 2012 02:25

ramana wrote:Darshhan, Please stop using the word. Its demeaning and hurts peoples feelings. Again all dont use that word.
Will delete all those posts in a little while.

ramana

Point noted. Apologies to anyone who was offended.Peace.

rgsrini · Post by **rgsrini** » 20 Jul 2012 07:33

JEM saar,
You have one more post to edit. It is the post where Darshan says "Chris Rock agrees with me".

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 20 Jul 2012 09:38

darshhan wrote:
venug wrote: Dean, there can't be any justification for arrogance. I believe what our guys say, if they say USN fired at them without warning, it is so, why should Indians buy about what US dishes out? I don't care about their justification. If this happens to an American, do they really give a rats a$$ to Indian justification? why are you even batting for US? I care about Indian lives, if India guys say they were fired without warning it is so.

Venu ji , There is no point in arguing with America Rakshaks. Brown guys like you or me do not stand a chance. On a lighter note , find an American and victimise him/her. Before pointing a finger at you , Americans should put their own house in order. Since the rate of homicides, rapes and violent robberies is so high in US cities , they shouldn't have a problem with your single indiscretion.

I am an Indian and proud to be one. I come from a Navy background and my Grandfather, Dad and uncle have all served in the forces. I have sailed across the Strait of Hormuz, (incl. once on an Iranian speedboat being eyeballed by the USN). I think that gives me a basic awareness of this situation and qualifies me to express my views here.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 20 Jul 2012 10:36

A recent Republican-Democrat spat in the United States Presidential race has cast light on some very curious questions. Questions that we've been wondering about on BRF for a long time, even if they've only just begun to occur to the American public. Indeed, this new eventuality might actually provide us with a key to solve the puzzle of America's unfolding game plan in West Asia and North Africa.

Republican Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, along with four other Republican representatives, sent letters to several top officials in US intelligence and policymaking circles last week. The gist of these letters was to raise questions about the affiliation of one of Hillary Clinton's top aides at the Department of State, Huma Abedin, with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Bachmann, of course, is known as a tea-party Republican of extreme political views; yet, her credibility is not entirely in doubt in this case, because she is also a member of the Congressional Intelligence Committee, and has access to classified information regarding international Islamist movements.

Huma Abedin is a Pakistani-American, married to a left-wing Democrat, former Congressman Anthony Weiner. Her father, born in undivided India, studied at the notoriously Islamist Aligarh Muslim University, and subsequently at the University of Pennsylvania. Her mother, Pakistani by birth, is currently a sociology professor at Dar-el-Hekma College in Jeddah.

Bachmann has raised questions about the established connections of Abedin's family members, including her father, mother and brother, to the Muslim Brotherhood. Many of Bachmann's suspicions, voiced in the letters she issued last week, appear to be corroborated by former members of the MB.

http://townhall.com/columnists/dianawes ... rotherhood

http://www.shoebat.com/documents/secretConnections.htm

In election season, of course, this has become a political football, with many Democrats lambasting Bachmann for going on a "witch hunt against Maw-slums." What is undeniable, however, is the extreme closeness between Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin. The Pakistani-American has been a top Clinton aide since 1996, and Hillary has publicly stated: "I only have one daughter. But if I had a second daughter, it would [be] Huma."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/ ... story.html

BRF-ites will recall a few things about the Clinton era: Bill Clinton's last-minute decision to include Pakistan on his "South Asia" tour itinerary in 2000, has been attributed to Hillary's influence. Moreover, during that same visit, Pakistani terrorists murdered 36 Sikh villagers at Chittisinghpora... an atrocity that Bill Clinton inexplicably ascribed to "Hindu Militants" in his introduction to Madeline Albright's autobiography.

Back then, was Hillary's "second daughter" partially responsible for Mr. Clinton's persistent tilt towards a nation whose closeness to Al-Qaeda and the Taliban had already become an open secret in Washington? Today... does Huma Abedin have a role in the persistent denial of a US visa to Narendra Modi by the US State Department, despite the overwhelming number of American corporate interests who would love to do business in Gujarat?

But these aren't the only questions. On a geopolitical scale, what is perhaps far more significant is the manner in which the American-led West has steadfastly supported Islamist groups in overthrowing the governments of several Arab states over the past few years.

Inevitably, we've been treated to Western apologist propaganda on this forum by our resident Opinion Manager, to the effect:

Who was the Americans preference for Mubarak's successor? The first choice on the hard security side was Omar Suleiman, head of Egyptian intelligence whom the CIA trusted almost completely since 1993, and whom the Israelis had confidence in.

On the liberal, State Department side the preference was for either El-Baradei, formerly of the IAEA, and then Amr Moussa, former secretary of the Arab League.

However, the Egyptian people themselves appear to be quite convinced that the candidate of choice for the US State Dept. was indeed Mohammed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/she ... _blog.html

In Egypt, Clinton reaffirmed Washington's "strong" support for Egyptian democracy, and met with newly-elected President Mohamed Morsi. The Egyptian protests came amid suspicions that Washington meddled in the election, even if Morsi, a candidate from the Muslim Brotherhood, wouldn’t have been America’s first choice.

Given the concerns expressed about the Pakistani-American "second daughter" of Hillary Clinton, Huma Abedin, how sure can we be that the MB was *not*, in fact, the US-led West's first choice to lead Egypt? And that the Syrian MB isn't Washington's candidate of choice to lead Syria?

Honestly, this is how it looks to me.

1) The US and West have not, by any means, given up on the idea that the best way to manage the North African/West Asian (NAWA) Muslim ummah is by nurturing and backing Sunni Islamist proxies.

This technique has worked for them in the past and they are convinced that it is the best option for them in future. It is the nationalist, Russia-leaning Arab leaders whom the West has always had a problem with: Nasser, Saddam Hussein, Gaddhafi and now Basher al Assad.

2) Sunni Islamism only became an urgent problem for the West with the rise of Al-Qaeda. Al-Qaeda was a former Western proxy that had spun out of control; most dramatically in Afghanistan, East Africa and the Arabian Peninsula, but with with a propensity to cannibalize North African movements like the Algerian GIA as well.

Al-Qaeda, therefore, had to be replaced by a more pliant sort of transnational Islamist network, one that was more susceptible to Western manipulation.

Thanks to people like Huma Abedin, Washington may well have begun to view the Muslim Brotherhood as a perfect candidate to advance this strategy. The MB represents the "Trotskyite" equivalent to a "Leninist" Al-Qaeda... willing to work through existing political systems, such as by contesting elections, while also organizing violent uprisings as a means to Islamic revolution. There is also significant factional bitterness between the MB and the pure Salafist/Wahhabandi leaders of Al Qaeda; so that any victory for the MB in terms of capturing Sunni Islamist mind-share on the Arab Street, represents a corresponding loss of influence for Al Qaeda.

At least one obvious British connection to the Muslim Brotherhood is easy to identify. The UK-based Islamist group Al Muhajiroun, which counts many British Pakistanis among its members, was initially founded by Omar Bakri Mohammed, an exiled member of the Saudi MB. Clearly the British fancy themselves sufficient masters of "divide and rule" to champion an ascendancy of the international Muslim Brotherhood at Al Qaeda's expense... yielding an advantage that could subsequently help London accrue greater influence in Pakistan via the MB's Al Muhajiroun affiliates.

The endgame of this would be to "rehabilitate" Pakistan as an Islamist rentier state for the West... except that the "bad Islamists" (Al-Qaeda-pasand Wahhabandis) would be sidelined in favour of "good Islamists" (MB-pasand Huma Abedin types) in the ranks of the TSPA and ISI.

All things considered, we shouldn't be surprised that the West (chiefly the US and UK) have been propping up a series of MB putsches against North African and West Asian regimes resistant to Western poodle-dom. The idea is that MB will gain at Al-Qaeda's expense in a zero-sum game, and hence provide a bulwark against the flagrantly anti-Western Al-Qaeda affiliates while serving all the useful purposes of an Islamist proxy for the West.

3) In accordance with the above: nearly all "Arab Spring" movements have ended up, or are tending towards, replacing a relatively independent nationalist leader with MB proxies... Morsi in Egypt, Jebbali in Tunisia, and currently the al-Ikhwan in Syria. It's no coincidence. This is exactly what the West wanted. The sole exception so far has been Libya, where a shaky coalition known as National Forces Alliance claimed a tentative electoral victory over the local MB... but knowing what we know of the Arab Street (and the sources of the funds, weapons and provocateurs who populate it)... this is hardly likely to last. And you can bet the West won't intervene when the Libyan MB shows the National Forces Alliance to the lamp-posts!

Of course, Bahrain had to remain untouched... the uprising there was by Shia Arabs, no friends of the MB, and besides-- Washington bases its Fifth Fleet in Bahrain.

4) All these events have left certain WA governments... like the Saudis and the UAE... very uncomfortable indeed. This is an important reason for the increased overtures by the GCC for better relations with India, that ShyamD has been alluding to for more than a year. The Saudis are happy to see Al-Qaeda contained, but they don't like the MB either (Bakri of the MB attempted a coup against the Saudi govt. in 1982, and has since then found comfortable asylum in Britain.) Riyadh is equally unhappy with its unmanageable relationship with Pakistan, and the growing numbers of MB-affiliated regime changes being foisted on neighbouring countries by the West.

5) India should keep in mind the danger posed by the West's machinations in NAWA. MB is at least as virulently Islamist as Al-Qaeda itself; their stated objective is an Ummah empire from Spain to Indonesia, and they are as murderous in their intentions towards Kafirs as anyone else.

The West's sponsorship of MB as an alternative Islamist proxy to replace Al-Qaeda only means that India will once again find itself on the hazardous side of this equation. Global Islamism in its MB avatar will be more conducive to Western manipulation than it was in its Al-Qaeda avatar... the nasty little lovers' quarrel between the West and Islamism which plagued the 1996-2014 era will soon be a thing of the past, and both sides will be cosy with each other once again. Pakistan's Islamist institutions, the Army and ISI, will be brought back into the Western fold by replacing their Wahhabandi-leaning ideologues with MB-friendly ideologues. From the Western point of view Pakistan will become "rehabilitated"... from our point of view, Pakistan will only become more virulent.

And inevitably, "Hindoo India" will once again become a target for Islamists with Western backing.

In West Asia, as in every other arena; in the Arab Spring, as in every other season of our history... India finds her security menaced once again by the stratagems of the US-led West, whose interests remain diametrically opposed to our own.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 20 Jul 2012 11:47

Huma Abedin is a Pakistani-American, married to a left-wing Democrat, former Congressman Anthony Weiner

Good analysis Rudradev, Weiner is the congressman who had to resign after indecent exposure on FB last year IIRC. The Weiner name appears to be Jewish.

hnair · Post by **hnair** » 20 Jul 2012 12:10

Anthony Weiner is Hassidim and was considered as a young Democrat with high potential by his own party. Infact one was surprised at that time, that public did not see any spotlight on his domestic side during the scandal, unlike say Spitzer and others. Pretty soft coverage of his spouse.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 20 Jul 2012 12:23

These are all warning for those who understand.
anybody going after the establishment will be a target

kshatriya · Post by **kshatriya** » 20 Jul 2012 13:57

Shooting at Batman Screening ...10 dead

Shooter may be Indian...Won't be suprised if its a Paki
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/36516 ... z219NJxX3z

Kanishka · Post by **Kanishka** » 20 Jul 2012 14:10

kshatriya wrote:Shooting at Batman Screening ...10 dead

Shooter may be Indian...Won't be suprised if its a Paki
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/36516 ... z219NJxX3z

Fox News reporting two gunmen, not just one. 10 to 12 killed. One in custody.
Fox retracts report of two gunmen, says only one and in custody.

kish · Post by **kish** » 20 Jul 2012 15:59

kshatriya wrote:Shooting at Batman Screening ...10 dead

Shooter may be Indian...Won't be suprised if its a Paki
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/36516 ... z219NJxX3z

It should be pakis masquerading as Indians. Indians, generally do not have tendency to do heinous crimes.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Jul 2012 16:26

which indians, the real indians (us) or the "red" indians?

kish · Post by **kish** » 20 Jul 2012 16:35

Singha wrote:which indians, the real indians (us) or the "red" indians?

BBC reporting the suspect is a 24 year old white male living nearby the theater. The apartment has been cordoned off and a through search is happening.

I was hoping it to be a paki sponsored terrorist attack.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 20 Jul 2012 17:04

its probably the usual random american style nutjob case
or
maybe its another breivik

Ashwin B · Post by **Ashwin B** » 20 Jul 2012 20:05

Suspect is a 24 year old "James Holmes" according to CNN here.

vic · Post by **vic** » 20 Jul 2012 20:39

Outlook (India) declares OBAMA underachiever.

US congress passes resolution to cut aid to Terroristan by USD 650 million

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 20 Jul 2012 20:42

RD, Tareq Fateh has been hammering on Huma Abedin's insidious role for long.

Infiltritation and soft subversion by influence at top policy levels (manchurian candidate scenario) is hard to establish and tackle for a democracy, it leads to McCarthyism. Yet McCarthy was not wrong (though he broke the spirit of democracy in his methods)as the cases of Alger Hiss and the Rosenbergs show.

India has its own soft subversives in many fields as we know.

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 20 Jul 2012 21:21

The Denver shooter is identified as James Holmes, whose mother lives in San Diego.
http://gma.yahoo.com/mass-shooting-colo ... ories.html

kshatriya · Post by **kshatriya** » 20 Jul 2012 22:13

It was very strange a newspaper immediately said "An Indian Male" when there was no official report about the suspect at that time

Nandu · Post by **Nandu** » 20 Jul 2012 22:52

darshhan wrote:Check out the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wBMHPvph ... re=related

Judging by the comments even the politically correct americans(so racist) are enjoying this song

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_Then_There_Were_None

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 20 Jul 2012 23:06

Another famous author... Enid blyton's legacy...
http://www.news24.com/MyNews24/Was-Enid ... t-20120514

This got me thinking, because dead as she may be, Enid Blyton is currently the top selling author of all time, with a staggering 700 million books sold! Surely her message of racial superiority must have filtered down into fertile young British minds (the entire Isles by all accounts), leaving generations of poisoned children?

Not that Enid Blyton is the original creator of racism, but she wasn’t shy to pass the baton-of-hate on to the next generation, and then some. When you look at the track record of the British (pre and post Enid Blyton) it does not make for happy reading.

From India to America, Palestine to Africa, Australia to Iraq, the English mindset has left nothing but sorrow in its wake.

This is relevant in South Africa because as much as we like to blame the Afrikaner for the ills of apartheid, the truth is that its roots were planted by those sanctimonious schoolmasters, the theistic English. The Afrikaners merely pruned the bush.