Yesterday I spoke with a Pakistani American who told me that he thought the partitioning (by England) of India into India and Pakistan (and two independent countries) was a mistake. His view was that because there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan, the notion that Hindus and Muslims belong in two different countries is a constant irritant.

While I agree, it is impossible to undo done political deals, especially where the formation of countries is concerned. If we consider how impossible it is to undo even relatively simple things like road tolls, rent control, or Social Security "entitlements," it is easy to understand that undoing entire nations is fantasy. Such things happen only when there's a major war, and even then, only with great difficulty.

It was quite a coincidence this morning to see a piece in Pajamas Media which touched on the formation of Pakistan -- Carol Gould's "Mumbai Highlights Britain's Threat from Within":

"Pakistan Simply Has No Right to Exist." Imagine if Pajamas Media had used that title for my article. All hell would have broken loose around the globe. Fatwas would have been flying everywhere.

Well, way back on January 3, 2001, a major editorial by Faisal Bodi appeared in the Guardian newspaper entitled, "Israel Simply Has No Right to Exist."

At the time I thought I was seeing things or that my New Year's tipple had damaged my faculties, but this was indeed the title of an article to welcome us into 2001. One of Bodi's many pronouncements was: "Certainly there is no moral case for the existence of Israel." I remember thinking, "Ah, so can we also say that there is no moral case for the existence of Pakistan, the creation of which resulted in one million deaths during partition in a fractured India of August 1947?"

After publication of Bodi's article Anglo-Jewry did not take to the streets. Israelis did not trash the British embassy and march with inflammatory placards, burning British flags stoked by smoldering copies of the Guardian. Bodi did receive threats but he is still flourishing seven years down the line in 2008. In fact, the reaction in 2001, as usual from Anglo-Jewry, was restrained. What is so interesting about Bodi's suggestion that Israel's existence is a blot on the human landscape is that a nihilist view on Pakistan, if anyone dared articulate it, would cause an international uproar. Yet the mayhem caused by the perpetual instability of that nation, born within the same year as Israel, far exceeds the world turbulence perceived by the media as being generated by the tiny Jewish state.

Noting reports that some of the Mumbai terrorists may have been from England (where angry Pakistani Brits spout vicious eliminationist rhetoric), Gould warns of an enemy within, and concludes that Britain should wake up:

So, what is the solution? Young Muslims need be led away from radicalism; imams who come here from abroad need to be vetted or deported. The "blame game" of seeing Kashmir, Palestine, and the Gulf as reasons to attack Americans, Jews, and Britons must stop. In the English-language UAE daily The National Dubai businessman Sultan al-Qassemi rails against the Mumbai attacks. In his article, "It's Not Enough for Muslims to Be Revolted by Terror," Al-Qassemi argues that nothing can excuse the terrorists' "bloodthirsty savagery," and that "the Islamic states must launch a psychological preemptive strike against [them], and -- more importantly -- [against] those who encourage them."

Britain needs to put into effect the much-derided time extension on detaining terror suspects. The police must, in turn, not waste taxpayers' money arresting MPs; Tory Damien Green was, to most sensible Britons' astonishment, detained this week, accused of leaking to the media details of the government's shortcomings in dealing with terrorists. Unbelievable but true.