..Of girls’s education and marrying off them early….

My college reopened today. One of my friends randomly made a comment “Why don’t you sit at home and look after your husband and kid”.. Err…

Then I remembered this person I mentioned in my below post…Now I  have a feeling that theer not just few,but many people out there who strongly belive that girls needn’t study and that their life is meant for 2-3 purposes alone..**sigh**

A post very close to my heart…

————-

This post is purely fictional and bears no resemblence with any characters dead or alive..

Last day,somebody told me so and so…

A: Girls should be married off by the age of 18-19..

Me:Err,isn’t that too early ..

A:Early? not at all..Bcoz by 20+,they will start making their own choices and will have own opinions

Me :So?

A: So? So ,parents should marry off girls before they start having firm opinions and start making decisions for themselves

Me :But isn’t it their life? Moroever,when we marry off them too early,how can they complete their eductaion?How can they have their career?

A: Ha,what is the need for girls to have so much education.The role of women in a society to make a good family and bring up kids in a good way .

Me :Of course that too is important,but it amazes me that a 21st century human being is saying that girls needn’t have much education..

A:All this ‘men-women equality and stuff is bullshit. Women cannot be equal to men.

Me:I never said that they are equal..Both are different on their own ways,but that doens’t mean that they weigh different in the balance of nature

A:Let me tell you an eg. Last day,there was an accident nearby,when a lady bumped into a sccooter-wala and he died..The lady was admitted to mental hospital for weeks..Have you ever heard of a man being mentally unstable just because he met with an accident?you women are silly and emotionally weak ,and let me remind you,they are physically weak since ages..

Me :You are generalizing,thatz not fair..

A:Ok,let me tell you something.What if I sent my daughter to study medicine.Obviously,by the time she passes out,she will be 24 yrs and so,and she will not accept proposals from any men on a lower grade than doctors themselves.

Me :whatz wrong in that? Its fine that a Doctor is looking out for a Doctor..

A:Its ok with her,but not for me,as I have find Crores of money for her dowry.

Me :Look out for boys who don’t ask dowry.

A:Such people exist only in theory.In pracitise,all people ask for dowry,and when it comes to higher grade boys ,as like Doctors,they ask for loads of gold and money..So tell me,should I let my daughter become a doctor and finally spoil my life in the name of her dowry,or should i marry off her to an average man,at the age mentioned earlier,when she is not so firm in her choices and opinions..On another note,there is no need for lady doctors..

Me: **faints** What??”No need for lady doctors”..

A::Yes,tell me what is the problem if there are male doctors alone? Afterall women are weak enough not to enter areas like surgery and such complicated stuff..Tell me how many efficent female surgeons and anesthesists have you seen or heard?

Me: Well,are you saying that there needn’t be female gynecologists too?A:Thats the only area where women can empathize with fellow patients..But even in that field,there isn’t a compulsory need. Labour and Cecarian will be fine in men’s hands too

Me : **girns** not knowing what to say..

A: coming back to the topic,i still stand by what i said,” Girls needn’t study much and should be married off early”..

Me :Err,this is complicated..But it is wrong that you dump her into somebody’s head even when she is immature to undertstand right and wrong in life..Moreover,if she is educated,if some problee happens in marriage life,she can stand in her own,instead of running back and crying in front of parents.

A:You are wrong.In real time,it is the educated girls who come back to families,while the other end girls move on with their life,rather than shouting for divorce and such.

Me :So,in the end,it is your happiness and not your daughter’s happiness that matters.. Ok fine,marry off your girl at 18,so that she will always be unable to resist the injustice that may happen and let her be a door mat..**sigh**

A::You are wrong,good girls will find happiness where they go..You women don’t know the world outside and hence you are making theoritical stmnts

Me : “How will we know the world and gain experience if you guys don’t let us? ”

A :”Oh,you alone is going to change the world”..

Me: ” Not really,but if i do my part, atleast my daughter will benefit from it”…

A : “Oh,so you want your daughter to become a feminist kinda girl and ruin her life” …

Me : I am glad I met you ..goodbye..

.

.

Moral of the story : Don’t argue with people who have pre-conceived notions..You will end up being labelled arrogant and outspoken…

p.s “Please do not criticize the person and say anything bad about her/him,as I don’t intend to hurt the person..But her/his thoughts are surely worth discussion,aren’t they?

What women do not want..

Blogadda is running a contest on “What women want?”..I am not really sure of what women want.To each its own..But when I read the below piece of news,I am pretty much sure of ‘What women do not want?”
Female condom with ‘teeth’
by Kate Townshend
.
.
Here’s a really interesting story from CNN about the release of a new ‘spiked female condom’ designed to protect women against rape and punish the would be perpetrators. South African doctor Sonnet Ehlers is distributing 30,000 of the new devices around South African cities where world cup matches are taking place, under supervision as part of a trial period.
The condom is inserted like a tampon, and should  penetration  take place, rows of tiny, jagged teeth like hooks attach onto the man’s penis. Although these do not break the skin, it then becomes impossible for him to remove without medical help, and any attempts to do so only make the device grip on more tightly.
.
.
Unsurprisingly the device is causing massive amounts of controversy. Critics argue that since women have to wear it any time they think they may be in danger, it exaggerates the likelihood of rape and keeps women in a state of constant fear. Equally, there are potential risks in terms of what else a thwarted and angry rapist may try to do.
.
.
I think its easy for us in the West to dismiss such a device as medieval and barbaric, but South Africa has one of the highest rape rates in the world, coupled with one of the lowest conviction rates. This article suggests that women are already taking extreme measures to put off would be assailants, including inserting razor blades into their private parts. Whether this is the answer or not (and I’m dubious personally) clearly something needs to be done to protect women in the country.
.
.
What was that? 😳 😕
.
.
Before we jump into conclusions,read below..
By 2006 the official figure for rape was over 55 000 ,
unofficially, based on the premise put forward by the National Institute of Crime Rehabilitation that only one in twenty rapes are reported, the figure is over 494,000 a year. This means that on average approximately one thousand three hundred women can be expected to be raped a day in South Africa. A study by Interpol, the international police agency, has revealed that South Africa leads the world in rapes. A woman was raped in South Africa every 17 seconds. This did not include the number of child rape victims. It was estimated that one in every two women would be raped. Between 28 and 30 percent of adolescents reported that their first sexual encounter was forced. Of South African men who knew somebody who had been raped, 16 percent believed that the rape survivor had enjoyed the experience and had asked for it. According to a recent study police estimated that only one in 36 rape cases was reported and of those only 15percent culminated in a conviction.[……….]
But…Is that how we deal with assulats against women? Are all women in this planet expected to wear this,in fear of being raped at any point of time? Many or most of us would love to live in denial that “Hey,this can’t happen to me”. But are we to spent our life in constant fear and ‘ready to attack mode’ 24/7? I don’t know..This news sickens me..Agreed that manyof the victims probably would wish they had had a device like this at the time of their rape, and any man who has been through this, even if not convicted of rape, would think twice before raping another victim .But still..doesn’t it take away the responsibility from men,to women?And it seems to me that it may induce a higher level of violence on the part of the attacker.  Psychological trauma24/7…Baaah… 😳
.
.
.
The only welcoming strip of news is what the Doctor herself said
“Yes, my device may be medieval, but it’s for a medieval deed that has been around for decades,” she told CNN. “I believe something’s got to be done … and this will make some men rethink before they assault a woman.“[…]
.
.
There are a lot of things that make this not work, but it is welcoming that people are addressing the problem, looking for a solution, and thinking out of the box.This may help to sent away the message that women are not always helpless.Women are indeed in sad state of affairs…Razors inside private parts..Teeth arms inside private parts..  **sigh**


.
.
.
.
Though not about ‘What women want’,I nominate my post to
Contest by:
Blogadda and Pringoo
—————————————————————–
(CNN) — South African Dr. Sonnet Ehlers was on call one night four decades ago when a devastated rape victim walked in. Her eyes were lifeless; she was like a breathing corpse.
“She looked at me and said, ‘If only I had teeth down there,'” recalled Ehlers, who was a 20-year-old medical researcher at the time. “I promised her I’d do something to help people like her one day.”
Forty years later, Rape-aXe was born.
.
.
Ehlers is distributing the female condoms in the various South African cities where the World Cup soccer games are taking place.
The woman inserts the latex condom like a tampon. Jagged rows of teeth-like hooks line its inside and attach on a man’s penis during penetration, Ehlers said.
Once it lodges, only a doctor can remove it — a procedure Ehlers hopes will be done with authorities on standby to make an arrest.
.
.
“It hurts, he cannot pee and walk when it’s on,” she said. “If he tries to remove it, it will clasp even tighter… however, it doesn’t break the skin, and there’s no danger of fluid exposure.”
Ehlers said she sold her house and car to launch the project, and she planned to distribute 30,000 free devices under supervision during the World Cup period.
“I consulted engineers, gynecologists and psychologists to help in the design and make sure it was safe,” she said.After the trial period, they’ll be available for about $2 a piece. She hopes the women will report back to her.
“The ideal situation would be for a woman to wear this when she’s going out on some kind of blind date … or to an area she’s not comfortable with,” she said.
.
.
The mother of two daughters said she visited prisons and talked to convicted rapists to find out whether such a device would have made them rethink their actions.Some said it would have, Ehlers said.
.
.
Critics say the female condom is not a long-term solution and makes women vulnerable to more violence from men trapped by the device.
It hurts, he cannot pee and walk when it’s on. If he tries to remove it, it will clasp even tighter.
.
.
It’s also a form of “enslavement,” said Victoria Kajja, a fellow for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the east African country of Uganda. “The fears surrounding the victim, the act of wearing the condom in anticipation of being assaulted all represent enslavement that no woman should be subjected to.”
Kajja said the device constantly reminds women of their vulnerability.
“It not only presents the victim with a false sense of security, but psychological trauma,” she added. “It also does not help with the psychological problems that manifest after assaults.”
.
.
However, its one advantage is it allows justice to be served, she said.
Various rights organizations that work in South Africa declined to comment, including Human Rights Watch and Care International.
South Africa has one of the highest rape rates in the world, Human Rights Watch says on its website. A 2009 report by the nation’s Medical Research Council found that 28 percent of men surveyed had raped a woman or girl, with one in 20 saying they had raped in the past year, according to Human Rights Watch..
.
.
In most African countries, rape convictions are not common. Affected women don’t get immediate access to medical care, and DNA tests to provide evidence are unaffordable.
Women and girls who experience these violations are denied justice, factors that contribute to the normalization of rape and violence in South African society,” Human Rights Watch says.
.
.
Women take drastic measures to prevent rape in South Africa, Ehlers said, with some wearing extra tight biker shorts and others inserting razor blades wrapped in sponges in their private parts.
Critics have accused her of developing a medieval device to fight rape.
.
.
“Yes, my device may be a medieval, but it’s for a medieval deed that has been around for decades,” she said. “I believe something’s got to be done … and this will make some men rethink before they assault a woman.”

Wordless Saturday

http://beta.thehindu.com/news/international/article477735.ece

.

.

.

.

.

.

A fresh estimate from the ministry of food processing says a whopping Rs 58,000 crore (Rs 580 billion) worth of agriculture food items get wasted in the country every year. This, according to government figures that usually underestimate negative social indicators.

Rough calculations show that the wasted produce could feed around 23.2 crore (232 million) people below the poverty line in rural areas.
According to the National Sample Survey Organisation, monthly consumption of over Rs 211.30 in rural areas is above the poverty line; Rs 454.11 per month is the mark set for urban areas.The recently-released National Family Health Survey-3 and assessments by the UN World Food Programme (WFP) have shown that 45.9% of Indian children under three are underweight, 38.4% are stunted, and 19.1% wasted.
Comparatively, only 10% of China’s children are underweight. India is home to the highest number of undernourished people in the world,says Dominique Frankefort, WFP-India’s deputy country director. This is nearly one-third of the world’s underweight children
.
.
New Delhi, Feb 18 (IANS)India is home to the largest number of undernourished people in the world, and the country director of the United Nations World Food Programme (UNFP) says that malnutrition in tribal areas is a vicious cycle of underdevelopment, ignorance and unemployment that requires a multi-pronged solution. Malnutrition among children below the age of three is pegged at nearly 44 percent against the sub-Saharan average of 25 percent in Africa, said Gian Peitro Bordignon, country director and India representative for the World Food Programme (WFP).
“In Chhattisgarh, one of the most backward tribal states in the country, nearly 50 percent of people in villages suffer from malnutrition. The food situation is pre-occupying,” Bordignon said.
The problem of hunger in Chhattisgarh’s tribal areas is complex, Bordignon said.According to him, it is a vicious cycle of underdevelopment, marked by total absence of income generating activity, ignorance and security-related problems that have led to lax supervision of food delivery programmes. This means reduced accessibility of the people to basic food items.
“The tribals in Dantewada don’t drink milk because they believe cow milk is meant solely for calves, not humans. As a result, they don’t milk their cattle. The tribals have limited access to fresh vegetables and fruits, and their intake of minerals and vitamins is inadequate,” he said.
.
.
.
.
.
Though my thought was to spread the pathetic condiiton of starved people across world,and to what extent do we,India,one among the largest producers fo food ,waste food, I have some different in mind now.. Does the condition mentioned about Dandewada and Chathisgarh,have got something do to with the naxalism happening there? I remember somebody asking me why don’t naxals go to court or contest in election..Are we talking about these people,who hardly have even food to eat?
.
.
.
.
Sources:

Why Zakir Naik is both right and wrong

Zakir Naik is one among the few,very few people,whose talks  come down to larger mass .. I have hardly heard or read of any other scholar other than Zakir Naik and Yusuf-al-Qardawi (blame it on my poor reading).Its been little more than 5 years that I started reading Zakir Naik.Some of his orations are good,like ‘Is terrorism a muslim monopoly’ and like.I had been a fan of him,but as time passed,as I read more and more of him,well, honestly speaking,I find many of his speeches absurd..

The most ridiculous one is his version of polygamy,when he says that ‘ In Western society, it is common for a man to have mistresses and/or multiple  extra-marital affairs, in which case, the woman leads a disgraceful, unprotected life. The same society, however, cannot accept a man having more than one wife, in which women retain their honourable, dignified position in society and lead a protected life.

Thus the only two options before a woman who cannot find a husband is to marry a married man or to become ‘public property’. Islam prefers giving women the honourable position by permitting the first option and disallowing the second. ”

What prevents a women from remaining single..His argument is an insult to womenhood.Agreed that being a mistress is disrespectful,but ‘Public Property’..B******t

Most annoyingly,some of his views are radical and wrong.He rants about comparing Islam to 2+2=4 and other faiths to 2+2=3.Considering the fact that he is a medical doctor,I wonder what made him say such nonsense.. The mathematical eqtn he is talking about is a universal truth,whereas religious beliefs are relative truth..If my God true to me,it needn’t be to another person. And it is high time he stop generalizing that all people except muslims are in wrong path..Nobody,even Prophet said so. Can Mr Zakir Naik please tell me whether wasn’t it Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) who said this?

“This is a message from Muhammad ibn Abdullah, as a covenant to those who adopt Christianity, near and far, we are with them.  Verily I, the servants, the helpers, and my followers defend them, because Christians are my citizens; and by God!  I hold out against anything that displeases them.

No compulsion is to be on them.  Neither are their judges to be removed from their jobs nor their monks from their monasteries.  No one is to destroy a house of their religion, to damage it, or to carry anything from it to the Muslims’ houses.  Should anyone take any of these, he would spoil God’s covenant and disobey His Prophet.  Verily, they are my allies and have my secure charter against all that they hate.

No one is to force them to travel or to oblige them to fight.  The Muslims are to fight for them.  If a female Christian is married to a Muslim, it is not to take place without her approval.  She is not to be prevented from visiting her church to pray.  Their churches are declared to be protected.  They are neither to be prevented from repairing them nor the sacredness of their covenants.  No one of the nation (Muslims) is to disobey the covenant till the Last Day (end of the world).”

Again,his comparison of human beings eating pork,to that of filthy animals,is sick..If he don’t like pork,let him stay away,why bother about others? If they aren’t bothered about tapeworm and red-content,let them have it.Why utter rubbish? (Don’t give me lecture that tapeworms can be killed by 100% cooking,I know it already)

And Zakir Naik says that apostates should be put to death.I have some idea of Quran,and nowhere have I seen Allah asking human beings to hang apostates,rather there are 3 verses that talk about people who trun away from religion,yet there is no reference to killing them..

And it goes on like that.. I don’t support Zakir Naik,nor do I support the ban.Is this the kind of freedom of expression that Britain ,and west in general is damn proud of? I thought it was Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan,who did acts like this.If they don’t support something,they ban it.Indeed an easy task.

If we condemn fatwa against Salman Rusdie,what makes this ban any diffferent?What irks me always is that how super-powers,who are champions of liberal and progressive thoughts, define the concept of “Freedom of Speech”.At least 909,681 people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq alone ,since the U.S. and coalition attacks, based on lowest credible estimates, all in the name of democracy and freedom of speech of their nation.About 303 times as many people have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq than in the ghastly attacks of September 11, 2001.More than 130 times as many people have been killed in these wars and occupations than in all terrorist attacks in the world from 1993-2004, according to data compiled by the US State Department.

So what if Zakir Naik as a person,as an individual,shouted against these super-powers ?Is he wrong in saying that Nato forces are terrorists toIraqis and Afghanis? It is his mistake that he tried to attach religion to his arguments.Otherwise,what he says is right,the rich are terrorizing the poor ans weak nation..Am I wrong? He seems to be funded by Saudi,which takes away any of the goodness present in his doings..But anyway,there has to be somebody to shout thet truth.Super-powers are terrorists in many nations.Our turn too will come,wait for that day dear Indians..Till then you can sing ga-ga-ri about such terrorizing nations.

Mr Zakir Naik and his associates should be glad that they live and work in a wonderful country like Inida,where else would you find tolerance and fredom to move around like this? Go try the other version of your oration in your mentor nation,Saudi..If you talk a word against them,nobody,even your breath would  know when and how they will pack you underneath soil.

I have a suggestion for Zakir Naik..If UK doesn’t need you,go to countries like Pakistan,Bangladesh,Nigeria ,Sudan,Algeria,Afghanistan,Niger,  Burkina Faso,Mali,  Senegal,Tunisia , Guinea , Somalia , Azerbaijan ,  Tajikistan ,Sierra ,Leone,Libya etc etc etc ,which are muslim majority countries.. Set muslims straight first,and then bother about non-muslim’s fate and their afterlife..And yes,I suggest you to improvise muslim conditions not only through religious classes,but also by showing them a way to live this life in earth..

Finally,I have a qstn to my readers,does Dr. Zakir Naik really “foment justify or glorify terrorist violence” or “seek to provoke others to terrorist acts?” You be the judge!

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

OFFICIAL STATEMENT ISSUED JUNE 17, 2010

Following on from recent malicious and specious reports in the British media about my work, a press release was issued dated 11th June 2010.
Further to this I am disappointed to learn the British Government has decided to exclude me from coming to the United Kingdom to conduct a Peace Conference Tour between 25th-27th June 2010.
Despite this I intend to continue my work of interfaith dialogue; Coming together upon common terms with other people and faith groups to promote a greater understanding of the binding strands existing between the faiths, whilst dispelling fears, suspicions and misconceptions about the beautiful faith of Islam, that have been created by a media frenzy of Islamophobia.
I encourage all Muslims to serve their country with dignity and honour and my message to vulnerable young British Muslims is that terrorism and violent extremism, is totally unacceptable and has no place in Islamic life.
I would urge the British Government to permit the Peace Conference Tour to continue as scheduled and assist in the promotion of Peace and social harmony, whilst upholding the values of freedom and justice.
– Dr Zakir Naik – 17th June 2010 [Source : http://www.islamnewsroom.com]

What had Dr Zakir Naik said one week before he was banned?

“I have spoken out on numerous occasions against all and any acts of terrorism and I have unequivocally condemned such acts of violence; acts including 9/11, 7/7 and 7/11 (serial train bombings in Mumbai) which are completely and absolutely unjustifiable on any basis,” eminent Islamic scholar Dr Zakir Naik had said on June 11, exactly a week before he was banned (June 18) from entering Britain for his alleged support to terrorism and “unacceptable behavior”.
Dr Naik had issued his signed statement in response to media reports in Britain preceding his scheduled visit (June 18-28), portraying him as “Preacher of Hate” and “Terror Backer”.
“I believe recent press reports in the UK media have given a warped and wholly unjustified impression of my work by portraying me as “Preacher of Hate” and “Terror Backer”. I categorically reject as falsehoods any such allegations. These are totally untrue and a misrepresentation of the truth. It appears these sensational headlines have been based on some of my quotes that have been given either without the relevant context or are completely wrong. It is clear from my talks, that in Islam, terrorism; the killing of innocent civilians is completely forbidden and as such I have unequivocally stated that no Muslim should be a terrorist.”
Dr Zakir Naik had clearly stated that during his UK tour he will give a message of peace and a clear and concise message to young British Muslims that terrorism and violent extremism, including suicide bombings killing innocent civilians have no place in Islam.
My tour to the UK will be focused on delivering a message of peace based on Islamic values and bridging the gap of understanding between the major faiths. My visit will include engaging in constructive and positive dialogue between members of different communities and to dispel the misconceptions of Islam. I will be delivering a message of peace, unity respect and tolerance for any differences that may prevail. I also understand the sensitivities and current difficult climate prevailing within the west and therefore my tour will also include a clear and concise message to young British Muslims that terrorism and violent extremism, including suicide bombings killing innocent civilians, is totally unacceptable and has no place in Islamic life, based on the Glorious Quran and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.”

“I hope to reach out to all youngsters and persons generally who promote confrontation and violence in the name of Islam; to engage in peaceful and constructive discussion with other communities, authorities and government to deal with any issues or grievances they may be fostering,” Dr Naik said in his June 11 statement on the letterhead of Mumbai-based Islamic Research Foundation that he heads.
He had said that he was discussing with lawyers in UK seeking legal remedy for his distorted image in the British media.
“It appears that some of the quotes have been taken from edited and manipulated excerpts uploaded onto the you-tube website including a talk that I delivered in 1996 in Singapore which was prior to the 9/11 atrocity. I am currently seeking advice from lawyers in the UK on the legal remedy and actions in the light of these reports.”
But ignoring his clarification about his views on terrorism and the purpose of his UK visit, the British government decided to ban him from entering UK the day he was scheduled to – June 18.
Announcing the ban, British Home Secretary Theresa May said: “Numerous comments made by Dr Naik are evidence to me of his unacceptable behaviour.” She further said: “Coming to the UK is a privilege, not a right and I am not willing to allow those who might not be conducive to the public good to enter the UK.”
BBC quoted a spokesman for Dr Zakir Naik as describing the move “deeply regrettable”. The UK government had bowed to pressure from certain groups to exclude him, he said. The spokesman further said Dr Naik had been holding talks in the UK for 15 years and the decision to bar his entry was disappointing.
Meanwhile the Muslim Council of Britain has deplored British Government move to ban Dr. Zakir Naik from entering UK. The Council said UK Home Secretary Theresa May’s action “serves to demonise the very voices within the world ready for debate and discussion.” [Source : Two Circles]


Zakir Naik’s reply to the ban imposed..

This is with reference to an exclusion order issued to Dr Zakir Naik by the British Home Office, UK Border Agency, dated 16th June 2010.

Dr Zakir Naik, the illustrious and eminent speaker from Mumbai, India, is respected and revered throughout the world for his enlightening and convincing efforts promoting similarities between major faiths based on converging values for a common platform of Peace, using the binding commonalities that exist between the religious scriptures including the Bible, Vedas, Torah and Glorious Qur’an.

Following on from recent malicious and specious reports in the British media about the work of Dr Zakir Naik, we are disappointed to learn the British Government has decided to exclude him from visiting the United Kingdom to conduct a Peace Conference Tour between 25th-27th June 2010.

It is deeply regrettable the British Government has bowed to pressure from sectarian and Islamophobic pressure groups by preventing the entry of Dr Zakir Naik, who has been visiting and delivering talks in the United Kingdom for the past 15 years.

In the wake of these inaccurate press reports, Dr Zakir Naik issued a press release in the United Kingdom dated 11th June 2010 which is attached herewith.

The exclusion order issued by the Secretary of Home Department UK, appears to rely mainly on the following four extracts from various talks by Dr Zakir Naik which they found objectionable;

Extract of Quote 1

“As far as terrorist is concerned, I tell the Muslims that every Muslim should be a terrorist… What is the meaning of the word terrorist? Terrorist by definition means a person who terrorises. When a robber sees a policeman he’s terrified. So for a robber, a policeman is a terrorist. So in this context every Muslim should be a terrorist to the robber… Every Muslim should be a terrorist to each and every anti-social element. I’m aware that terrorist more commonly is used for a person who terrorises an innocent person. In this context, no Muslim should even terrorise a single innocent human being. The Muslims should selectively terrorise the anti-social element, and many times, two different labels are given to the same activity of the same individual …  Before any person gives any label to any individual for any of his actions, we have to first analyse, for what reason is he doing that?” (Source – video google)

Extract of Quote 2

“Beware of Muslims saying Osama Bin Laden is right or wrong, I reject them… we don’t know. But if you ask my view, if given the truth, if he is fighting the enemies of Islam, I am for him. I don’t know what he’s doing. I’m not in touch with him. I don’t know him personally. I read the newspaper. If he is terrorizing the terrorist, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, he’s following Islam” (Source – You Tube – 2006)

Extract of Quote 3

“How can you ever justify killing innocent people? But in the same breath as condemning those responsible we must also condemn those responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon” (As reported by the Manchester Evening News, 21 August 2006 as part of a speech you gave at the Expo Islamia conference in Manchester.

Extract of Quote 4

“strongest in enmity towards the Muslims are the Jews and the pagans…. It [the Quran] does not say that the Muslims should fight with the Jews… the Jews, by nature as a whole, will be against Muslims… there are many Jews who are good to Muslims, but as a whole … The Quran tells us, as whole, they will be our staunchest enemy” (Peace TV, recorded on You – Tube)

The clarification of these quotes, provided by the British Home Office, is cited below:

Clarification of Quote 1

The context of the quote given was against an article according to The Times of India newspaper, Mumbai edition, (Times News Network, Wednesday August 20, 2003).

“Mr. Angre is amongst the five officers, who between them, have gunned down more than 300 alleged criminals in the past five years. The very mention of their names evokes terror in the underworld”.

Dr Naik said; “…The moment the underworld hear the name of Inspector Angre, they are terrified, so Inspector Angre of the Mumbai Police Force is a terrorist for the underworld of Mumbai”.

Therefore after reading the extract of the quote in context provided by the British Home Office from one of the Dr Zakir Naik’s talks, any sensible and logical person would not object as the extract quoted is self explanatory.

Clarification of Quote 2

Many journalists ask Dr Zakir Naik regarding his views about Osama Bin Laden. Due to the fact that he [Osama Bin Laden] has not been convicted in respect of 9/11 and as Dr Zakir Naik cannot verify the claims against him, he neither considers him a saint nor a terrorist.

There is not a single statement of Dr Zakir Naik after 9/11 in which he has praised Osama Bin Laden or supported his activities.

With regards to the extract of a quote on Osama Bin Laden taken from a video on YouTube, this clip was taken from a lecture Dr Zakir Naik delivered in Singapore in 1996, almost five years before 9/11 and not in 2006, as has been posted.

It is therefore not possible to link this quote to Osama Bin Laden in the context of the 9/11, when the atrocity had not taken place; and took place after almost 5 years in 2001.

The lecture was recorded by some local people [in Singapore] and was later edited and uploaded on You Tube by a prejudiced group. Unless and until we have the rushes (original unedited tapes) of the program, it is not possible to know which portions of the lecture have been edited.

It is therefore not reasonable, in the light of Dr Zakir Naik’s known views about 9/11 and all other atrocities such as 7/7 (London, UK) and 7/11 (serial train bomb blast in Mumbai, India) to link these manipulated and very old comments to recent world events.

Dr Zakir Naik has emphatically and regularly condemned any and all persons responsible for these appalling atrocities, killing innocent civilians.

Clarification of Quote 3

It appears the British Home Office has quoted Dr Zakir Naik only condemning attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon from the article published in Manchester Evening News on 21st August 2006.

However, the same article also reported Dr Zakir Naik condemning and criticizing the atrocities of New York (9/11), London (7/7) and Mumbai serial train bombers (7/11) before he condemns the attacks on Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon “in the same breath”. The context of which is cited below:

“However, Dr Zakir Naik, described by organizers as “the most sought after Muslim public speaker in the world”, criticized the actions of the New York, London and Bombay bombers”. (Manchester Evening News 21.08.06).

Clarification of Quote 4

Dr Zakir Naik was quoting from the Glorious Qur’an which says in Surah Ma’idah; chapter 5: Verse 82;

“Strongest amongst men in enmity to the Believers will thou find the Jews and the Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the Believers will thou find those who say, “We are Christians”.

In this context Dr Zakir Naik said “strongest in enmity towards the Muslims are the Jews and the pagans…. It [Qur’an] does not say the Muslims should fight with the Jews… the Jews, by nature as a whole, will be against Muslims…. there are many Jews who are good to Muslims, but as a whole …The Qur’an tells us, as a whole, they will be our staunchest enemy.”

Dr Zakir Naik has fervently criticized Adolf Hitler in many of his lectures as the greatest terrorist in the human history for his anti-Jewish policies and his atrocities for incinerating six million Jews.

As a student of comparative religion, Dr Zakir Naik has worked tirelessly for the common good amongst people of all faiths engaging in constructive debate and dialogue. These discussions have been hugely successful and have resulted in much progress towards a better understanding of Islam as well as enhanced harmony between people of different beliefs, dispelling fears, suspicions and misunderstandings.

Dr Zakir Naik is undoubtedly an opponent of terrorism and as such has often spoken out against all acts of violence and violent extremism. He has emphatically and unequivocally condemned the killing of civilians and is one of the world’s regular noted orators on this topic.

In the wake of the exclusion order and based on legal advice, Dr Zakir Naik intends to bring the matter before the High Court of the United Kingdom and request a Judicial Review to have the exclusion order overturned.

We would request the Indian authorities to engage with and make representations to the British Government about the excellent services and work of Dr Zakir Naik in promoting Peace and social harmony worldwide. We would propose the Indian Government to encourage the British Home Office to revoke the exclusion order and permit the Peace Conference Tour to continue as scheduled, whilst upholding the values of freedom and justice.

For Islamic Research Foundation,

Maqbool Barwelkar

Public Relations Manager

18th June 2010, Mumbai, India.


Source:http://irf.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=241:mockery-freedom&catid=44:yoocarousel-slideshow-newsflash

.

.

.

.

.

..

My take …on another post….