Psychology Of Terrorists – Key Takeaways

I recently finished reading Psychology of Terrorists by Raymond H. Hamden. I decided to write this post to analyze the key ideas the author has included in the book and see how they apply to India.

This post is a deeper dive than my usual posts, so settle in for a longer read.

Reasons for Radicalization

The book places a strong focus on understanding why someone becomes radicalized in the first place.

It could stem from a difficult past shaped by parents, relatives, or even state officials. In such situations, terrorism becomes a way for them to channel their suppressed anger. It could also come from a long sense of discrimination or oppression, which makes people vulnerable to extremist groups looking to push their own agenda.

While this explanation works in many cases, it can’t be applied to everyone.

Take India, for example. Kashmiri Hindus faced years of injustice, yet they didn’t turn to violence. Their response shows that not everyone reacts to trauma in the same way. It also raises a bigger question. Can radicalization really be justified by blaming external factors alone? At some point, there has to be honest introspection about why disproportionate numbers of extremists emerge from certain sections of society. And this introspection can’t come from outside. It needs to happen within the communities themselves, just as the book explains in detail.

Different Takes on Terrorism

When we deem someone a terrorist, it remains clearly subjective and depends on which side we as individuals are on.

If we are on the side of the victims, we will easily call it terrorism. If we are on the side of the aggressor, we might call it something else entirely to justify self-defense.

As the author mentions, one person’s terrorist can be another person’s freedom fighter. So while I might see someone as an extremist for supporting a particular group, they could just as easily see me the same way for sympathizing with another.

This clash of morals isn’t something that can be fixed easily, but it can at least be recognised.

Disguise

Among the aims of terrorists is to delegitimize the government in the eyes of the people as an attempt to bring to the surface what they view as wrongful actions being taken by the government, and have the public on their side.

One of their techniques is to disguise themselves as civilians and provoke governments into attacking the wrong group, which casts the government in a terrible light.

In today’s social media world, it has become incredibly easy to gather people around a cause. We saw this during the 2020 Delhi Riots, where religion-based WhatsApp groups were created to organise protests against the CAA. Protests are a normal part of any democracy and often help highlight important issues. The problem begins when large gatherings get infiltrated or managed by groups that want to cause harm or steer the movement in a direction that was never intended.

Bringing students or young people into political movements isn’t new, but history shows that outcomes can sometimes take unexpected turns. Events like the Iranian Revolution or Bangladesh remind us that unrest and sudden regime changes can lead to even more restrictive systems coming into power. The most vulnerable tend to be women. In Iran and Bangladesh, women-led protests are becoming the norm, but it is met with uncomfortable silence by the global majority.

A concerning pattern is how quickly narratives can shift. When a protest turns violent, and action is taken against those involved, it can be reframed as persecution. In a country like India, where claims of victimhood often circulate through celebrities, politicians, and media, these narratives can be picked up and amplified. This creates an environment where genuine concerns get overshadowed, and the focus slowly shifts from raising awareness to pushing an agenda. It’s becoming harder to take action against someone who has actually done something wrong because the narrative shifts so quickly.

Global Terror

The age of modern terrorism commenced when the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) hijacked an El Al plane coming from Tel Aviv and going to Rome. Planes had been hijacked before, but this had symbolic value as it had a certain aim. It was also the first time in history where hostages were used to meet demands. This operation gained a lot of attention from the media, which worked to increase both awareness and moral panic.

The point about media attention is important because many terror groups depend on heavy media coverage to spread fear. This particular incident marked a shift where the media became a tool for amplifying messages of terror.

The book shares an interesting view on how the media should be careful when reporting such events. Detailed coverage can unintentionally motivate lone wolves to copy these attacks. But there’s another side to it. If an incident doesn’t get enough attention, groups might feel pushed to plan something even bigger just to be noticed. It feels like there’s no real win here, no matter how the media handles it.

Funerals

The first was the so-called Islamic sea burial that the United States had for bin Laden. Several Muslim scholars, such as the Grand Sheikh of Al Azhar (leading world institution for Islamic decisions) in Egypt, condemned this type of burial and confirrmed the fact that a sea burial is against Islamic traditions and requirements. The United States argued that its reason for this type of burial was to prevent having bin Laden’s burial place become a shrine.

In India, the idea of a burial site turning into a shrine is often raised in public discussions, especially by nationalist voices. Historical figures from the Mughal era, who arrived as conquerors, now have grand memorials that many people celebrate. We’ve also seen large gatherings at the funerals of individuals linked to extremist activities. For example, reports noted that Yakub Memon’s funeral in Mumbai drew a crowd of around fifteen thousand people, while Abdul Kalam’s funeral on the same day saw much smaller public participation.

The argument at the time was that there wasn’t enough proof against Yakub Memon, and many attended the funeral as an expression of empathy for what they believed was unfair treatment. But this pattern repeats often. Even when solid evidence exists, parts of society dismiss it as manipulated or fake. This creates confusion and frustration, especially among vulnerable groups, and can unintentionally push some people toward more extreme opinions.

This gap in how different groups perceive guilt and justice is why global events, like the killing of Osama Bin Laden, triggered such mixed reactions. Even when someone is widely known to have committed violent acts, the responses can vary dramatically depending on personal beliefs, political views, and community narratives.

Though President Obama did come out after this event and declare that the United States was not at war with Islam, and that bin Laden was in fact not a Muslim leader, the event was interpreted in a number of different ways by different individuals, politicians, and states.

For instance, Hamas leader Ismael Haniya and the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt both condemned the killing of Osama bin Laden, whereas Palestinian Authority spokesman Ghassan Khateeb and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad both provided positive feedback from the event, saying that it was a landmark event marking the end of an individual who was involved in terror and destruction.

Difference Between Extremism and Terrorism

People like me often use the terms extremism and terrorism interchangeably, but the author clearly differentiates the two:

Terrorism is a call to and threat of violence. Extremism is about achieving a political goal and changing minds to fit one’s own agenda. Al Qaeda engaged in terrorism, and the Iranian revolution was about extremism.

He goes on to cite a report that says extremism will be more of a threat than terrorism in the years to come:

A report by the Strategic Foresight Group (2007) estimates that extremism will be more of a threat than terrorism in the years to come. The objectives of extremist groups focus largely on infiltrating their ideas into the minds of individuals, especially youth.

Extremists are no longer engaging in terrorist acts but are instead aiming to and promising the people of reaching a “better world.” The term better, of course, is relative, since it originates from their own perspective. Their strategy has been proven successful in several countries. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt won a large percentage of Parliament seats in the elections of 2005. Likewise, the theocratic regime in Iran has currently grown and become more powerful and influential.

Since extremism tends to act as a precursor to terrorism, the main issue is how those extremists enforce their beliefs. If a violent means is taken, then those extremists have now become terrorists (Martin, 2009). This smooth dispersion of extremist groups and their success across a number of countries is viewed by many as a dangerous phenomenon facing the coming generations.

In Kerala, there have been instances where groups like Jamaat-e-Islami make statements suggesting that a true believer should naturally support the idea of an Islamic Republic. Views like this find an audience, often strengthened by political narratives and by those who want communities to feel that only a religion-based party can truly protect their interests.

We’re beginning to see similar patterns in small pockets across India. A recent example was the BMC election in Maharashtra, where a noticeable share of Muslim votes shifted from the Congress to Owaisi’s AIMIM. It shows how identity-driven messaging can influence political choices, especially when people feel their concerns aren’t being addressed by mainstream parties.

Victimhood Narrative

When well-known figures like AR Rahman speak publicly about feeling targeted, it pushes the broader anti-minority narrative that is often circulated about India. In many cases, the larger context gets lost. Is the person actually being targeted for their religion, or is there another reason behind it? When the feeling of communalism becomes dominant, fueled by media, politicians, global platforms, and society in general, every other explanation gets brushed aside.

This isn’t unique to India. The victimhood narrative is a global trend, especially in countries with strong free-speech cultures, where organised groups know how to shape public opinion.

The victimhood narrative also pops up when a government is pushed into taking strict action against extremist activities. This creates a cycle where narratives overshadow facts, and public perception becomes the real battleground.

Research conducted by Jeanne Knutson in 1981 allowed her to argue that victimization remains the motivating force behind much political violence in the contemporary world.

Victimization is defined as a personally experienced injustice, which the victim recognizes to be unnecessary (or unjust), and which creates a basic fear of annihilation. Discrete events that may cause victimization and have the strength to change the victim’s perception of the world can cause them to defend themselves or their group in order to reduce the chances of experiencing secondary victimization against the self, family, community, or all three.

Since a majority of terrorist activity will involve some form of victimization, we recognize a vicious cycle where terrorism and victimization breed and feed into one another.

Education

Though many people argue that better education would prevent radicalisation, events like the 2025 Delhi terror attack show that even well-educated individuals can be drawn into violent ideologies.

In November 2025, a car explosion near the Red Fort in Delhi was treated by Indian authorities as a terrorist incident after it killed and injured several people, and investigations linked it to suspects with professional backgrounds. This shows that no level of formal education alone can make someone immune to extremist beliefs.

The author emphasizes this point:

With regard to their educational background, findings suggest that the majority of participants have received some formal education, with 38.5% holding bachelor’s degrees and 23.1% having received high school diplomas. Most participants were reported to have been married (46.2%), while 38.5% admitted to being single and 7.7% divorced.

People across varying socioeconomic statuses, levels of education, cultures, and nationalities can be influenced by radical ideology. In fact, it is noted that many individuals within well-known Middle Eastern terrorist groups, such as Al Qaeda and the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), come from middle-to-high-income families and possess high levels of education. Often, these individuals have specializations in aeronautical engineering, chemistry, and information technology; skills that are used to meet specific goals of the organization, particularly with planning violent attacks.

In matters of extremism, religious influence can outweigh education and even personal relationships.

One clear-cut example of psychopathic traits in a terrorist is illustrated in Nezar Hindawi, a Jordanian terrorist who, upon sending his pregnant girlfriend on a flight to Israel, had a bomb planted in her luggage, unknown to her. This terrorist clearly demonstrates psychopathy in that he was willing to sacrifice his girlfriend and his unborn child, with callousness, and no sense of remorse in doing so.

Blaming External Factors

When terror attacks take place, supporters of the violence often shift the blame to the victims by claiming they somehow enabled the situation. We’ve seen this in debates where writers like Arundhati Roy framed the Mumbai attacks as a reaction to the situation in Kashmir, or where the October 7 Hamas attacks were described by some as a response to the suffering of Palestinians. This was seen even after the recent Pahalgam attacks. Yet the same reasoning is rarely applied when discussing the persecution of Kashmiri Hindus or minorities in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Despite these groups never resorting to violence, their experiences are still dismissed or minimised by people who otherwise speak strongly about human rights.

This selective empathy reflects a broader human tendency. We often assign positive motives to the actions of our own group and negative motives to others. For example, if someone from our social circle fails to contribute to a donation, we might assume they have a genuine reason. But if an outsider does the same, we’re more likely to label them as selfish or uncaring.

The psychopathic terrorist will make “you statements,” thereby accusing his opponent of being involved with criminal and/or terrorist-related activities. He is likely to see himself as the victim rather than the perpetrator. He is likely to make statements such as “I am not the terrorist. You are the one causing terror. You are the reason for all this destruction.”

In such an instance, he is essentially blaming his opponents for his own destructive behavior. If involved with a religious or political terror group, he may use their ideologies to blame oppositional religious or political groups for the destruction from their own violent attacks.

In most of the research, fundamental “terrorists generally do not regard themselves as terrorists but rather as soldiers, liberators, martyrs, and legitimate fighters for noble social causes. Those terrorists who recognize that their actions are terroristic are so committed to their cause that they do not really care how they are viewed in the outside world. Others may be just as committed but loathe to be identified as terrorists as opposed to freedom fighters or national liberators” (The Psychology of the Terrorist, n.d.).

Stockholm Syndrome

According to the author, feelings similar to Stockholm Syndrome are quite common during hostage situations involving terror groups.

While the psychopathic terrorist holds no concern for his hostages, it is possible that he may display a charming persona toward them. Assessing for Stockholm syndrome is vital, especially if the crisis is drawn out for a long period of time, as it could increase the chances of hostages experiencing feelings of affection and trust for the terrorist. If hostages develop positive feelings toward the psychopathic terrorist, this can be dangerous and can interfere with the successful capture of the terrorist, as hostages with Stockholm syndrome may work with or even risk their own lives to help the terrorist.

Religious Angle

The religious angle remains one of the strongest factors behind many modern terror attacks. This pattern isn’t limited to any single faith or community.

“It is certainly true that many horrible things have been done under the cover of religion—the inquisition springs to mind along with Islamic terrorism and the Catholic–Protestant wars that have raged and influenced European and American politics for centuries” (Desai, 2013; see also Valencia et al., 2011).

Dulles (2002) further observes that Christianity has had more than a fair share of religious tensions in human history. Christians have persecuted Jews and fought wars against Muslims, within Christianity; there have been internecine wars, especially between Roman Catholic and Protestants, but sometimes with Eastern orthodox. Influenced by these postulations, casual observers accept as fact, even in western culture, that religion is the worst culprit of the global terrorist attacks (Okoro, 2008)

These characteristics may be illustrated in the followers of many religious groups having the sense of a messianic or apocalyptic dream in their political vision, which comprises the thought of political dominance of a state (or the world) through its association. Believers of these groups take the dream of future prominence gravely, where power and control compensate for their present deprivations.

Methods of Countering Radicalization and Prevention

There are methods to counter radicalisation within communities. In India, these efforts are often difficult to put into practice because they face immediate pushback in the name of persecution or discrimination, a narrative that can easily gain momentum in India and abroad through media and political voices. Still, there’s a lot India can learn from places like Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE, where structured deradicalisation programs have shown promising results.

When national security is at stake, the focus needs to stay on addressing the issue rather than endlessly worrying about political correctness.

This approach was utilized by the Saudi Arabian government as part of a multipronged terrorist deradicalization program. By having clerics of the Islamic faith engage in an in-depth discussion of the Islamic text versus misinterpretations used by terrorist organizations, these facilitators served as mentors and built strong relationships with those in the program. In doing so, the Saudi Arabian government claims to have a success rate of 80–90% within their participants, with low recidivism (Bouchek, 2008).

As part of their multipronged approach, the Saudi Arabian deradicalization program utilized family members of the terrorist to help with the reintegration process. In doing so, the program was highly eective in changing the ideology of a large portion of the participants in their program (Bouchek, 2008). If the individual feels a need for belongingness with his family and community, he is unlikely to rejoin his terrorist group.

The process of deradicalization is only one aspect of counter-terrorism, and if utilized in insolation it will likely result in partial success. Family members and the community must be involved in creating positive change for the detainee.

These are some of the reasons why many Gulf countries see fewer terror attacks and remain relatively safe. They have systems in place to identify and address extremist ideas right at the root.

There are two measures mentioned in the book that I do not necessarily agree with:

Another aspect of the deradicalization process involves improving the quality of life for the terrorist. Quite often individuals become a part of terrorist organizations as a result of external factors, such as difficult socioeconomic conditions, as well as internal factors, including low levels of self-efficacy and self-esteem and challenges gaining control of their lives. Therefore, this aspect seeks to reduce potential economic barriers by providing educational opportunities, vocational training, and job placement. By being provided the opportunity to be a contributing member of society, the terrorist will experience an increase in self-worth and self-esteem. Terrorists can also be helpful in deradicalization efforts and researching the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs for other terrorists. This process allows released terrorists to reintegrate back into society.

In addition, the state must be able to provide incentive as positive reinforcement in keeping the terrorist away from the terrorist group. These incentives can come in the form of housing, monetary income, or education or through providing employment opportunities.

Improving someone’s quality of life doesn’t always work when their mindset is already deeply radicalised. Many individuals involved in extremist activity may have a stable education and enough resources to take care of themselves, so their motivations can be more ideological or political than economic.

Better living conditions might help people who aren’t fully radicalised and who take part in lower-level acts, like stone pelting, mainly for quick financial gain, but it doesn’t address those who are already committed to an extremist worldview.

I also don’t fully agree with the idea of using financial incentives as a solution. India has seen examples where offering money or support to separatist figures like Yasin Malik didn’t lead to moderation. Reports over the years have suggested that leaders who were expected to act as mediators continued to support extremist ideas despite the assistance they received. This shows that financial rewards alone cannot shift someone who is already strongly influenced by radical beliefs.

What does work, and what India needs more of, is a strong prevention-first approach. Violent extremism should be tackled early through families and local communities. Prevention programs in schools, workplaces, and community centres, along with clear public awareness campaigns, can make a real difference. These efforts help build resilience at the grassroots level before harmful ideas take root.

Media Exposure

The media has been both a boon and a bane. On the one hand, it keeps the public informed when terror attacks take place. On the other hand, incorrect or sensational reporting has sometimes ended up becoming a useful tool for terrorists.

Media exposure is a goal of many terrorist groups. Attracting the audience’s attention is important to terrorist groups who value the media as they offer a direct outlet for them to attract this attention and get their message across, for free.

In India, we often see extremist actions being described as “mental health issues” to prevent lone attackers from gaining attention or becoming examples for others. But this approach can have the opposite effect. When members of a group feel their actions aren’t being acknowledged, some may escalate to more violent methods in an attempt to get their message noticed.

Though there have been efforts made by the media to censor certain people or organizations that carry out terrorism in hopes of prevention, this may in fact act to further exasperate the situation and cause unheard of or suppressed terrorists to become even more violent and attract the attention they desire.

Some argue that the media has played a huge role in the spread of Islamophobia. To the dismay of many, the media also “protects” individuals who are terrorists, by portraying them in a way that defends their acts of terrorism—for example, by attributing their motivations to mental health issues even though this may be inaccurate.

How Terror Groups Look for Recruits

In the age of social media and constant online access, it has become very easy for terror groups to look for potential recruits on the internet.

The comments sections on websites covering terrorism news reveal a divided world and provide easy access for terrorist groups to leverage their resources to mobilize more support for their cause by spreading propaganda and receiving funds. Terrorist group manifestos are easily available online for the public to access. Terrorist groups have websites that provide information in detail about their cause and how to become a member.

Terrorist groups have Twitter accounts (Murgia, 2017), post videos on YouTube, and have an active social media presence. The millions and billions of accounts present on social media websites provide a huge pool of potential “candidates” for terrorists to recruit.

People who have faced inequality, discrimination or long-term social injustices often become the most vulnerable to radical ideas. When someone feels marginalised or unheard, it’s easier for them to be drawn toward groups that promise protection, identity or a sense of belonging.

Recruiters usually look for individuals who lack strong family support, are dealing with financial stress or are searching for acceptance. These situations make a person more likely to absorb extremist ideas without fully thinking through the harm such ideologies can cause.

Cognitive Dissonance

We also see cognitive dissonance among terror sympathizers. Research shows that while many people may agree with or support a group’s ideology from a distance, most are not willing to actually engage in violence. When someone believes in an idea that promotes violence but also believes that harming others is wrong, the clash creates an internal conflict. This is what we call cognitive dissonance. In simple terms, it’s the uncomfortable, anxious feeling a person gets when they hold two opposing beliefs at the same time.

Conclusion

Understanding terrorism isn’t just about looking at the violence itself. It’s about recognising the layers beneath it, the personal struggles, community influences, political narratives, and global patterns that shape how people think and act.

Psychology of Terrorists highlights how complex these motivations can be, and looking at them through the Indian context makes the picture even more layered.

If there’s one takeaway, it’s that radicalisation doesn’t grow overnight. It grows in silence, in neglected corners of society, in unchecked narratives, and in environments where fear or resentment is allowed to spread. Countering it needs awareness at home, in schools, in communities, and in the way we talk about these issues in public. Prevention, more than punishment, is what actually helps.

The topic is uncomfortable, but it’s necessary. Only by understanding how radicalisation works can we build stronger, safer communities and ensure that extremist ideas find less space to grow.

Netflix Movie Spotlight: Baramulla

What defines horror? We often think of ghosts, possessed souls, or strange creatures with no clear form. Yet I realized there’s another type of horror that hits harder. The ones that combine these supernatural ideas with the harsh truths of real life. This is a type of blend that creates an impact, which stays with you long after the movie is over. This is where Baramulla is about.

What’s It About?

Baramulla opens with a policeman who moves to Kashmir and stays in an old house filled with secrets. He is there to investigate the disappearance of children in the area. Strange events start to unfold at once. The elder daughter senses a foul, “dog-like” smell in the house, even if there are no dogs. The caretaker carries a plate of food every day to a locked room. What lies behind these mysteries? Why are children vanishing? These questions drive the heart of the story.

Thoughts

I can’t, unfortunately, share everything I felt without giving away the main plot. Since I wanted to share my thoughts in full, I placed them in a separate “Spoilers Ahead” block after this section. You can skip it if you prefer to avoid spoilers.

Baramulla left me with many emotions. I was genuinely amazed by how the team crafted it.

The movie tries something that Indian cinema, to my knowledge, hasn’t attempted before in a horror movie. That is, blending the past and the present into a story that’s rooted in historical events. It reminds you that horror has layers. It’s not only about the unknown, but also the known. The horror of trust turning into betrayal. The horror of being dismissed or gaslit. The horror of violence, both mental and physical. Baramulla captures all of this with sharp clarity.

The performances are strong across the board. Personally, I would say it’s a must-watch.

Baramulla is now streaming on Netflix.

Spoilers Ahead

I felt emotional through many scenes. The acting was powerful and honest. The pain never felt exaggerated.

By now, you probably know that the film draws from the suffering Kashmiri Hindus faced in the late ’80s and ’90s. Many cast members are Kashmiri Hindus who had to flee their homes. Manav Kaul is one of them. He left Kashmir when he was in grade 4. He moved on to become a competitive swimmer in his late teenage years and participated in state and national-level championships. He has more than 14 national medals in swimming to his credit.

The end scenes also show Sanjay Suri, which is befitting, since his father was killed by terrorists in Srinagar when Suri was just 19. He moved to Delhi after that and became a known face in the film industry.

The producer and writer, Aditya Dhar, who is also Yami Gautam’s husband, is a Kashmiri Pandit. He has been using his craft to share Kashmir’s story with care and technical prowess.

Some Kashmiri Pandit celebrities, like Kunal Khemu, have chosen not to explore their past, and that is their personal choice. In an interview with Smita Prakash, he said he doesn’t know much about that period, even though his own family lived through it.

I feel it’s important for us to understand our history so we don’t repeat old mistakes. Stories like these should be passed from one generation to the next. My only regret is not asking my grandfather about his experiences—how Kerala felt during the Indian freedom struggle, and what life was like then. Those anecdotes have been lost forever, as he did not pass on the stories to his children as well.

It’s remarkable that so many Kashmiri Hindus who had to flee the valley are using art to express their experiences instead of resorting to violence. Their goal is empathy and understanding, something they were denied for a long time, not provocation. Choosing storytelling over violence is admirable, especially in a world where violence is often justified in the name of resistance.

There are also a few Kashmiri Hindus with left-leaning views who defend problematic groups and take part in “Free Kashmir” sloganeering, similar to how a very small number of non-Zionist Israelis speak in ways that don’t reflect the wider population.

Most Kashmiri Hindus (and some Kashmiri Muslims) have appreciated the movie. However, left-leaning Hindus are also criticizing the movie for “propaganda,” even though the events have been well documented. Films that depict and educate the viewers on crimes against Muslims in India are welcomed, while films showing crimes against Hindus are often dismissed as Islamophobic, nationalist, or propaganda. This imbalance is where many activists struggle. They accept one truth but not the other.

People like me have slowly stepped out of that mindset to face the whole truth.

It may take a while, but I really believe the truth will eventually reach wider acceptance sooner or later. And the stories can’t stop until the pain is finally acknowledged. They need to be told, retold, and carried forward. Only then will they finally find the place they deserve.

From 26/11 to Delhi Blasts: Why the “False Flag” Narrative Must End in India

What surprises me more than the terror attacks in India is the speed with which some Indians dismiss them as “false flag operations.” For instance, a look at the comments under Faye D’Souza’s Instagram post about the Delhi terror blasts shows several users mocking the incident and blaming the Indian government instead of the perpetrators. Many genuinely seem to believe it’s a political ploy to influence votes rather than an act of terror.

The “false flag” narrative isn’t new. It has surfaced after nearly every major terror attack in India. Even the 26/11 Mumbai attacks were, at first, misrepresented by some as an internal operation. The claim gained attention mainly because Ajmal Kasab, one of the attackers, wore a saffron thread on his wrist. Those spreading the theory strangely assumed such a thread could only belong to members of BJP or RSS. They overlooked the possibility that it might have been deliberately used to mislead investigators.

Ajmal Kasab with Saffron Thread on His Wrist

Kasab’s real plan, as later revealed, was to die appearing as a “Hindu” and thus shift suspicion away from Pakistan-based handlers, reinforcing the myth of “saffron terror.” Thankfully, due to the extraordinary courage and sacrifice of Assistant Sub-Inspector Tukaram Omble, Kasab was captured alive and later confessed to being a Pakistani national trained by terrorists.

Tukaram Omble and Mumbai 26/11 Attacks — Tukaram Omble

By then, however, the false-flag theory had already gained widespread circulation. Well-known public figures even released a book titled 26/11: RSS ki Saazish? that promoted the “false flag” theory surrounding the attacks.

Influential Figures Promoting RSS ki Saazish Book — Influential Indian Figures Promoting “26/11: RSS ki Saazish?” Book

The “false flag” narrative resurfaced after the Pulwama terror attack, when a suicide bomber from Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) drove an explosive-laden vehicle into a CRPF convoy in Pulwama, Jammu & Kashmir, killing 40 soldiers. Following the attack, some voices in Pakistan, including senior officials, suggested that India might have staged the incident to influence the upcoming 2019 elections. Commentators in India echoed similar theories online, framing the tragedy as politically motivated rather than acknowledging it as an act of cross-border terrorism.

Then came the recent Pahalgam attacks, where Pakistani media outlets and online commentators claimed that India had staged the incident to divert attention from domestic issues and influence elections. They described it as part of an alleged “Indian playbook” of false-flag operations. Soon after, similar talking points appeared in sections of Indian social media and commentary spaces.

In each case, claims of “false flag operations” lacked credible evidence and were primarily rooted in conspiracy theories first circulated in Pakistan and later amplified by certain opinion groups in India.

The Global “False Flag” Obsession

It’s worrying that many people in India tend to believe external narratives about terror attacks rather than trusting verified investigations at home.

This pattern might have been up for serious debate if it only happened locally, but the deflection from religious extremism appears to be a global trend. To cite a few examples:

The 9/11 attacks are still viewed by some as a “false flag” orchestrated by the U.S. or Israel to malign Muslims. This is a theory long disproved but still used by extremist groups to recruit followers. They thrive on anger, convincing vulnerable minds that violence is the only response to perceived oppression. In India, extremist recruiters have similarly exploited stories like the Babri Masjid while dismissing events like the Godhra train burning as conspiracies, weaving grievance into a tool for radicalization.
The October 7 attacks in Israel were also met with widespread conspiracy claims, framed as a false flag operation meant to discredit certain groups.
Likewise, criticism of regimes such as Iran’s leadership, the Taliban, or Hamas is often dismissed as Western propaganda. This is another form of deflection that prevents honest introspection.

Conspiracies Shield Extremists

It’s time to move past the overused “false flag” narrative.

Each time a terror attack is dismissed as a conspiracy, it insults the victims, weakens trust, and blurs the line between truth and propaganda. These baseless claims don’t protect anyone. They only embolden extremists and deepen divisions.

Real courage and national unity will come from confronting facts, condemning violence without bias, and demanding accountability from those who spread hate, no matter where it comes from.

Ending the false flag obsession is the first step toward restoring integrity in how we respond to terrorism.

Personal Takeaways from American Manhunt: Osama bin Laden

I’ve watched many documentaries on Bin Laden, but what sets American Manhunt: Osama bin Laden on Netflix apart is that the U.S. intelligence officers themselves are narrating the incident. It shows a side of intelligence officers we rarely see or acknowledge: one that’s vulnerable, emotional, and capable of error, just like any of us.

The fact that they faced extreme guilt after 9/11, plus humiliation from those who expected them to have superhero capabilities, shows us that intelligence work is a thankless job. You’re not remembered for the hundred attacks you prevented, but for the one you didn’t.

We tend to view intelligence agencies as all-knowing, supreme beings capable of preventing every threat. But they are made up of people just like you and me – flawed, prone to mistakes, and constantly learning how to address loopholes.

Almost every terrorist attack in the world has been labelled an “intelligence failure.” In most cases, including Mumbai’s 26/11, intelligence agencies had some idea that an attack was likely. But without knowing exactly when, where, or how, they couldn’t act decisively. Acting on vague information risks wasting resources and creating false alarms.

We owe our intelligence officers greater respect and appreciation, not just criticism.

Another key takeaway was the deep distrust the U.S. had toward Pakistan. They chose not to inform Pakistani authorities about the Osama bin Laden raid, fearing it would be sabotaged. This seems to negate Pakistan’s constant claims of being a victim of terrorism rather than a supporter of it. After the raid, the Pakistan army tried to shoot down the U.S. Navy SEALs’ helicopter. If they are actively involved in the fight against terrorists, why resist when others take them down for you?

One U.S. intelligence officer mentioned that Al Qaeda had regular contact with Pakistani nuclear scientists. It makes you think of Pakistan’s constant nuclear blackmail. Are they using it against the U.S. as well by implying that if Pakistan collapses or goes bankrupt, its nuclear arsenal could fall into the wrong hands (such as the terror groups that want to take down America)? Is this how they get their IMF loans approved? Perhaps this fear is why the U.S. continues to be soft on Pakistan, even though it sheltered the prime suspect in the 9/11 attacks. We will never know.

India Pakistan War: Why Peace Is No Longer a Viable Option

Even if India agrees to peace talks with Pakistan, who exactly are we supposed to talk to?

The Pakistan Army? The army chief, Asim Munir, has called Kashmir their “jugular vein” – they aren’t letting go. He raked up anti-Hindu, anti-India sentiments before the Pahalgam attacks. He stated, “Our forefathers believed that we were different from Hindus in every possible aspect of life,” and urged parents to instill this bigoted narrative in their children to preserve Pakistan’s identity.

The Pakistani Prime Minister? Just a puppet with no real power over the military. Funerals of designated Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorists have been attended by members of the Pakistani Army, further reinforcing allegations of state complicity. Such actions raise serious concerns about the Pakistan government’s commitment to counterterrorism, especially when these individuals are recognized as terrorists by the international community.

Pakistani celebrities? They won’t even whisper a word against state-backed terrorism. They rarely acknowledge well-documented facts, such as Osama bin Laden having found safe haven within Pakistan’s borders. They speak about “having a voice” in Pakistan. Yet, none have dared to criticize Asim Munir for his communal, anti-Hindu remarks, despite knowing that Hindus are living within their own country as well.

The civilians? The majority views India as the villain and often denies the existence of terrorists within their own borders. This raises an important question: Do they not consider figures like Osama bin Laden, Hafiz Saeed, and Masood Azhar as terrorists? Are they seen merely as ordinary civilians? When they refer to “terrorists,” is it only groups like the Balochistan Liberation Army (BLA) and other factions causing unrest within Pakistan that they have in mind?

So really. Whom should we sit across the table with to discuss peace? There are no viable options.

Attacks Initiated by Pakistan

In all the following attacks initiated by Pakistan, India has demonstrated extreme restraint:

Attack	Year	Fatalities
Bombay Blasts	1993	257
Lajpat Nagar Blast	1996	13
J&K Assembly Blast	2001	38
Parliament Attack	2001	9
Raghunath Temple Attack	2002	12
Kurnool Train Crash	2002	20
Akshardham Attack	2002	33
Mumbai Bombings	2003	52
Delhi Blasts	2005	62
Varanasi Blasts	2006	28
Mumbai Train Blasts	2006	189
Samjhauta Express Blast	2007	68
Hyderabad Blasts	2007	42
Jaipur Blasts	2008	63
Ahmedabad Blasts	2008	56
Mumbai Attacks (26/11)	2008	166
Patna Bombings	2013	6
Pathankot Attack	2016	7
Uri Attack	2016	19
Pulwama Attack	2019	40
Pahalgam Attack	2025	26

India’s restraint in the face of repeated cross-border terrorism is often seen by Pakistan as a weakness. The ongoing attacks have led many Indians to believe that simply maintaining the status quo won’t bring lasting peace.

India’s Efforts Towards Peace Have Gone Unnoticed

India has made several efforts in the past to reach out and promote peace. We have celebrated Pakistani singers, actors, cricketers, and artists, and defended them when the Indian government initiated a ban against them.

Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan was revered, even after singing a controversial song with the line “Muslims should not allow kafirs (non-Muslims) in their homes.” Mahira Khan and Hania Aamir were regulars in Bollywood fashion pages, and Indian women admired Fawad Khan.

Yet, none of these figures had the courage to denounce the terror networks in their own backyard or question Asim Munir’s communal statements.

We extended every olive branch, but it was met with betrayal, silence, and violence. It’s time to stop romanticizing those who wear a false pro-India mask while harboring hatred.

Pakistan’s Blatant Radicalism

In the current war, the Indian Army has focused on precision strikes targeting terrorist camps and military assets, with considerable efforts to avoid civilian harm. The death of any innocent civilians in terrorist camps is deeply unfortunate, but could have been avoided by Pakistan. Why were civilians present in known terrorist camps? Were they placed there deliberately to attract international sympathy and deflect blame?

In contrast, Pakistan’s use of drones in civilian zones has drawn comparisons to Hamas-style tactics against Israel. If not for the advanced air defence systems in both India and Israel, the death toll could have been far higher.

Pakistan has often revealed its radical side openly. To cite a few examples:

In a recent interview with Sky News journalist Yalda Hakim, Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Asif acknowledged his country’s historical support for terrorist organizations. He stated, “We have been doing this dirty work for the United States for about three decades… and the West, including Britain.”
Khawaja Asif, while addressing a session of the Pakistan National Assembly, said that students in madrassas will serve as the country’s second line of defence in wars, when needed, implying they are disposable.
The former director general of the ISI, Asad Durrani, in an Al Jazeera interview, said the death of 150 APS Peshawar school children was “collateral damage” in pursuit of “broader” national interests.
Mubasher Lucman, founder of the Pakistani television network ARY Digital, during a podcast with journalist Naseem Hanif, stated that if Pakistan were to win a war against India, he would want to claim Indian movie actresses as maal-e-ghanimat—a term historically referring to war spoils, including enslaved women (sex slaves).
During a protest outside the Pakistan High Commission in London on April 25, 2025, following the Pahalgam terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir, Colonel Taimur Rahat, Pakistan’s Army and Air Advisor in the UK, made a provocative throat-slitting gesture towards Indian demonstrators. This is perhaps the first time a diplomat of any country has made such a shocking and radical gesture in public. The act not only defies diplomatic conduct but also reflects a deeply irresponsible and provocative mindset, especially in the context of a civilian tragedy.
Former Pakistani cricketer Danish Kaneria, one of the few Hindus to represent Pakistan at the international level, publicly accused former teammate Shahid Afridi of discriminatory behavior during their time together on the national team. Kaneria alleged that Afridi repeatedly pressured him to convert to Islam and excluded him from team activities, including meals.
Shahid Afridi’s cousin, Shaquib Afridi, was a commander of the Islamist terrorist group Harkat-ul-Ansar. He was killed by Indian security forces in Anantnag, Jammu and Kashmir, in 2003. Reports indicate that Shaquib had been active in the region for approximately two years prior to his death.
In an undated video that surfaced online, former Pakistani cricketer Shoaib Akhtar discussed the Islamic prophecy of Ghazwa-e-Hind, which refers to a prophesied battle for the Islamic conquest of India. In the video, Akhtar stated: “Ghazwa-e-Hind is mentioned in our sacred books. We will first capture Kashmir and then invade India from all sides for Ghazwa-e-Hind.“
Pakistani actor Hamza Ali Abbasi has publicly expressed support for Hafiz Saeed, the founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba and the alleged mastermind behind the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks.
In a televised discussion, Waqar Younis praised Pakistani cricketer Mohammad Rizwan for offering Namaz during a match, emphasizing it was done “in front of Hindus,” which he found particularly satisfying.
Zaid Hamid, a Pakistani political commentator, propagated conspiracy theories, claiming that the 2008 Mumbai attacks were orchestrated by “Hindu Zionists.” He has also stated that India will be “trounced and enslaved according to Sharia if Hindus don’t repent and embrace Islam.“

The videos and news articles for each controversy listed above are available online.

If Pakistani diplomats, politicians, cricketers, and celebrities act this way and are left largely uncriticized, what hope do you have from ordinary civilians?

The “Jugular Vein”: Kashmir

Pakistanis and the international community often focus on the “oppression of Kashmiri Muslims” and the call to “free Kashmir,” but they conveniently overlook the genocide of Kashmiri Hindus, a community forcibly displaced from their ancestral land. They are yet to return out of fear.

The genocide of Kashmiri Hindus (whitewashed as an “exodus”) is a tragic chapter in the region’s history. They, as the indigenous people of the land, have every right to return to their homes. Many Kashmiri Muslims are ready to welcome them back, acknowledging the need for healing and reconciliation. However, Pakistani-backed terrorists continue to block this process, instigating violence and creating an atmosphere of fear every time Kashmiri Hindus attempt to settle in Kashmir.

The narrative of “freedom” for Kashmir remains incomplete without acknowledging the rights and voices of the Kashmiri Hindu community. As the original inhabitants of the region, their cultural and historical ties to Kashmir that span thousands of years. Any move to integrate Kashmir into Pakistan would only deepen their marginalization. History bears witness: the Hindu population in Pakistan has sharply declined due to forced conversions, persecution, displacement, and violence. These facts raise serious concerns about the future of Kashmiri Hindus under such a scenario. To safeguard their identity, rights, and survival, it is vital that Kashmir remains an integral part of India.

It is time the international community recognizes this truth and supports the return of Kashmiri Hindus to their land, allowing for genuine reconciliation and the restoration of peace. Until this happens, international human rights activists should shift their focus to the “Free Balochistan” and “Free Iran from Islamic Regime” campaigns. Currently, they are more oppressed than Kashmiris, and their plight requires global attention.

UN Resolution

The United Nations (UN) has addressed the issue of Kashmir through Resolution 47, passed in 1948. The resolution emphasizes the right of the Kashmiri people to self-determination. It proposes that a plebiscite should be held to allow the people of Jammu and Kashmir to decide whether they wish to join India, Pakistan, or remain independent.

However, this resolution also includes conditions for the plebiscite, the most important being the withdrawal of “all Pakistani nationals” and “tribal forces” from the region to create a neutral environment for a fair vote. This is the first requirement in Resolution 47 that needs to be met. However, it does not get stressed enough.

The presence of Pakistani-backed terrorists in the region complicates the situation and directly contradicts the conditions of the UN resolution. Until Pakistan withdraws these forces and halts its support for terrorism, the possibility of implementing the UN resolution’s provisions remains unfulfilled.

I have covered this information in detail in a separate Kashmir Plebiscite blog post.

War or Peace?

Every past peace talk with Pakistan has failed. Not once, but multiple times.

Should India keep repeating the same cycle just to comfort a few people’s idealism? At what cost? More lives, more betrayal, and more denial?

I’m not advocating for war. But let’s be clear. Peace isn’t possible with a neighbour who constantly thirsts for our blood.

In such times, I choose to trust our Indian leaders, intelligence, and armed forces to make the best call for protecting the nation, not some random social media activist who would sell their soul for money.

If my country wants to teach the neighbour a lesson, I would support it. If it says it’s going to withdraw, I would support that too. In other words, the country comes above everything else. Jai Hind.

***

Photo by Pixabay

Thoughts on Pahalgam Islamist Terror Attacks on Hindus

The Pahalgam terror attack has deeply shaken most Indians. There is widespread anger over how Pakistan repeatedly escapes accountability, always armed with excuses and justifications.

India’s global PR remains weak, and our narrative often struggles to gain international traction. This was evident when Indians in New York pointed out the lack of coverage in local newspapers about the deadly attack. On an international subreddit, the news only gained attention after the now-viral zipline video was shared.

Many aspects of the attack are both infuriating and frustrating. The mood in India is one of outrage and a strong demand for retribution. Blocking Pakistani channels or celebrities no longer feels like enough, and emotional appeals from Pakistanis leaving India are falling on deaf ears. This attack has hardened public sentiment, and barring a few outliers, Indians squarely hold Pakistan responsible for the atrocity.

What Happened in Pahalgam?

To those unaware of the Pahalgam terrorist attacks in Kashmir, here’s a summary:

On April 22, 2025, five armed militants attacked tourists in Baisaran Valley near Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, killing 26 civilians (24 Hindu tourists, one Christian tourist, and one Muslim pony operator). Survivors reported that the assailants asked victims to state their religion or recite Islamic verses before executing them, indicating a targeted assault based on religious identity. Men were exclusively targeted. Women and children were let go to send a message to the government.

Some survivors reported that militants pulled down the pants of men to check for religious affiliation (circumcision) before executing them. A local Muslim pony operator, Syed Adil Hussain Shah, was also killed while attempting to protect tourists.

The Resistance Front, linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba, initially claimed responsibility, citing opposition to India’s residency policies in Kashmir, but later retracted the claim, possibly due to pressure from the Pakistan army and government.

The attack has escalated tensions between India and Pakistan, with India accusing Pakistan of supporting cross-border terrorism, leading to diplomatic and military standoffs.

Here are some personal reflections on the incident.

Pakistan is Unequivocally Responsible for the Pahalgam Attacks

The terrorists involved have either been identified as Pakistani nationals or as locals trained in Pakistan. Multiple foreign intelligence agencies, many from India’s key allies, have confirmed this, a fact echoed even by senior opposition leaders like Shashi Tharoor. The strong international support for India’s right to retaliate, especially from countries with robust intelligence networks, further validates this conclusion.

Pakistan’s claim of non-involvement is a hollow defense. It has a long history of denying its role in cross-border terrorism, despite being globally recognized as a terrorism hub. Numerous international reports support this assessment that Pakistan harbours terrorists. Yet Pakistan continues its unwillingness to acknowledge or address its complicity.

The U.S. State Department’s Country Reports on Terrorism (2023) have consistently highlighted Pakistan’s role in supporting terrorist groups. A 2023 CRS brief titled “Terrorist and Other Militant Groups in Pakistan” acknowledges that Pakistan has not addressed the presence and activities of India-focused terrorist organizations within its borders. Pakistan has faced accusations from various countries, including Afghanistan, Iran, apart from India, regarding its involvement in supporting terrorist activities.

Reports about Pakistani grooming gangs in the UK have recently gained wider attention. Channel 4 released a documentary titled “Groomed” to highlight the challenges posed by radical elements within the Pakistani community. However, many Pakistanis continue to deny these allegations, reflecting a broader reluctance to acknowledge responsibility.

Now, consider the situation in Balochistan. The Pakistani state consistently denies any human rights violations against the Baloch people or Afghan refugees within its borders. Despite numerous reports by international observers and activists highlighting enforced disappearances, military crackdowns, and systemic discrimination, the official narrative remains one of denial.

This consistent pattern of denial of wrongdoing can be observed among many Pakistanis. Rarely does one encounter a Pakistani voice calling for introspection or addressing internal societal issues. Their narratives often center around victimhood rather than accountability.

This is enough proof for us Indians to not blame our own citizens or institutions. We unequivocally hold Pakistan responsible for consistently enabling and orchestrating attacks on Indian soil.

Indians Are Tired of Pakistan-Sponsored Terrorist Attacks

The prevailing sentiment across the country is one of anger and exhaustion. Not since 26/11 has India witnessed such a brutal and calculated attack. But unlike then, today’s social media era has magnified public outrage, capturing raw emotions in real-time and amplifying them.

The Pahalgam attack has visibly polarized the population. Even those who once advocated for peaceful ties with Pakistan have changed their stance.

There is overwhelming support for any strong retaliation the Indian government may undertake. What is unacceptable, however, is inaction. The nation now waits to see how India’s leadership and armed forces will respond.

No Peace Talks

While Pakistan is appealing to the U.S. to urge India to show restraint, a line has clearly been crossed. One that makes peace talks impossible for India.

When Pakistanis ask India to consider the impact of war on innocent civilians, I can’t help but ask: Did they think of the 26 innocent lives lost in Pahalgam? Tourists who simply wanted a peaceful vacation were mercilessly killed. Empathy cannot be one-sided. True peace can only come when Pakistan stops meddling in India’s affairs.

Before the attacks, Pakistani military officer Asim Munir made blatant communal anti-Hindu and anti-India remarks. Shockingly, many in Pakistan praised him for it, calling him “based.” One wonders how Pakistani Hindus must have felt, hearing their own army chief endorse such dangerous rhetoric.

When a state is founded on religious division, lasting peace becomes elusive. With religion used as a political weapon, expecting normal, diplomatic ties is no longer feasible.

“Terrorism Has No Religion”

This is one of the most misleading narratives circulating in India today. Unless we openly acknowledge the religious motivations behind certain attacks, we cannot begin to address the root of the problem. The same voices that insist terrorism has no religion are quick to label incidents as “Saffron Terror” when Hindus are involved. If we must condemn all forms of terror, then Islamist terror should also be called what it is, without fear or double standards.

Many are quick to dismiss the religious angle of the Pahalgam attack as “Godi media” spin. But listen to the testimonies of the victims’ families. Wives of those killed have said the attackers asked about religion and demanded if the victims knew the Kalima. These weren’t random killings — Hindus and a Christian family were segregated and targeted based on their religion. They were shot because they couldn’t recite the Kalima. The one Muslim who lost his life was a case of collateral damage. He died while attempting to rescue tourists, not because he was targeted for his religion. His death, though tragic, was not the result of religious persecution. Denying this truth about religion-based terror doesn’t preserve harmony; it disrespects the grief of the families and gaslights the country.

Yes, these acts may be part of Pakistan’s larger plan to incite communal unrest within India. But brushing it aside for the sake of “secular optics” is irresponsible. Islamist terrorism must be named and condemned, just as we expect when extremism comes from the other side.

That said, this must not translate into hatred toward Indian Muslims. The goal should be unity, not division, at this hour, as Pakistan seeks to fuel our internal conflicts.

Online Narrative Building

A false narrative is being pushed by Pakistani accounts equating Kashmir to Gaza. Selective photos of demolished houses are being circulated to claim that innocent civilians are being targeted. The truth? Only a few houses, specifically linked to Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists, have been taken down.

Why demolish these homes? Because it works. Uttar Pradesh saw a sharp drop in violence when this policy was applied. It strikes at the emotional core — many of these terrorists fear repercussions for their families more than for themselves. Harsh measures are sometimes the only language hardliners understand.

Don’t fall for the curated propaganda pushed by well-networked handlers online. Check the facts. Stand by the truth.

Believe the Victims

When the families of Hindu victims share that they received no help from locals, believe them. That is their lived experience. Gaslighting them to protect a broader narrative is unfair and unjust.

Yes, some locals helped tourists — that’s also true. But acknowledging one truth doesn’t mean erasing the other. Both realities can coexist. Let’s not silence genuine pain to score points in debates.

Let Justice Prevail

Pakistan must be held accountable for spilling innocent Indian blood and disrupting Kashmir’s path to peace and progress. This time, the punishment must be appropriate so that next time they will think twice before sponsoring terrorism.