What's new

BJP praises Darul Uloom for fatwa against terror

Flintlock

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
6,176
Reaction score
0
BJP praises Darul Uloom for fatwa against terror
1 Jun 2008, 1600 hrs IST,PTI

NEW DELHI: Generally known for minority-bashing, the BJP on Sunday went the extra mile to compliment leading Islamic seminary Darul Uloom at Deoband for its fatwa declaring terrorism as the "most inhuman crime".

At the same time, the party took potshots at the Congress-led UPA at the Centre, saying its refusal to enact an anti-terror law shows that it wants to equate Muslims with terrorism.

Welcoming the Darul Uloom edict in his address at the party's National Executive meeting, BJP president Rajnath Singh noted that "Deoband is seeking to dissociate Muslims from terrorism."

But, he said, the Central government wants to equate Muslims with terrorism and on this very basis is rejecting an anti-terrorism law.

"Perhaps, the Central government wants to prove itself as a bigger messiah of the Muslims, even bigger than the madrassas," he said.

Continuing its attack on the government on the issue of internal security, he said the PM Manmohan Singh’s administration has "completely failed" to tackle terrorism and reiterated demand for a tough POTA type anti-terror law.

He spoke about the repeal of POTA, dubbing it a step taken with an eye on votebank, and Union Home Minister Shivraj Patil's comments virtually equating Parliament attack convict Afzal Guru with Sarabjit Singh, an Indian on death row in Pakistan.

Singh cited the spurt in terror attacks in the last four years and reports about stock markets and sensitive nuclear installations coming on the terror radar to reiterate his demand for a POTA-type law.

"Even after being completely exposed within and outside the country, if the government does not feel the need for an anti-terrorism law, then this would not only reflect its immaturity but also raises questions about its honesty," he said.

The BJP president said the Prime Minister seems to have accepted that terrorism is a national problem and it cannot be dealt with at the state level.

"He (Prime Minister) has called for a separate federal investigating agency for dealing with terrorism. I am surprised that the Prime Minister feels the need for a federal investigative agency but does not feel the need for a federal law," he said.

"This means that there is a need for an army but not for arming the military," he added.

Singh slammed the Centre for keeping pending Acts against organised crime passed by BJP-ruled Gujarat, Rajasthan and Madhya Pradesh.

"I would like to question the Central government about its intention on the issue. If they want to honestly support state governments in their fight against terrorism, then it should immediately grant approval to these Acts," he said.

He also referred to the issue of illegal Bangladeshi immigration and urged the Prime Minister to call an all-party meeting to frame a national policy on the issue.

"I appeal to all political parties to reconsider their policies on the problem of Bangladeshi infiltrators with an open mind....," he said.

Very good move by BJP.
 
. .
Its amusing how we universally condemn a fatwa against miniskirts and welcome one against terrorism with open arms!

Aren't both kinds of fatwas equally effective or valid?

I guess Deoband is a "leading" Islamic seminary, whatever that means....

Does anyone know who has the real power in India as far s religious rulings are concerned? As far as I know its the All India Muslim Law Board. Do these guys have any association with the Deoband school?

Lots of questions and very few answers...
 
.
Its amusing how we universally condemn a fatwa against miniskirts and welcome one against terrorism with open arms!

Aren't both kinds of fatwas equally effective or valid?

I guess Deoband is a "leading" Islamic seminary, whatever that means....

Does anyone know who has the real power in India as far s religious rulings are concerned? As far as I know its the All India Muslim Law Board. Do these guys have any association with the Deoband school?

Lots of questions and very few answers...


Dear SA,

Mini skirts don't kill but terrorism does.

Regards
 
.
Dear SA,

Mini skirts don't kill but terrorism does.

Regards

So the fatwa that seeks to prevent deaths is automatically valid? How does that work?

Fatwas, whatever their intentions/consequences may be, are still fatwas.

Its effectiveness depends on who is listening to which fatwa-maker.
 
.
So the fatwa that seeks to prevent deaths is automatically valid? How does that work?

Fatwas, whatever their intentions/consequences may be, are still fatwas.

Its effectiveness depends on who is listening to which fatwa-maker.

Whether the fatwa works or not is not the issue but the point that someone is ready to stand up to the terrorists is whats imp.

Regards
 
.
Its amusing how we universally condemn a fatwa against miniskirts and welcome one against terrorism with open arms!

A very interesting point you raise Stealth. I feel, you may object accusing me of playing the muslim card, but then it appears so that when it comes in the interest of west( i used west inrelated context), thinks become legal, otherwise illegal.
 
.
Whether the fatwa works or not is not the issue but the point that someone is ready to stand up to the terrorists is whats imp.

Regards

Yes I agree with that. I fully support said fatwa too :P

However, it is questionable whether this fatwa will have the desired effect on those already resigned to the extremist path.

After all, the real terrorists don't exactly listen to 'moderate' preachers.
 
.
A very interesting point you raise Stealth. I feel, you may object accusing me of playing the muslim card, but then it appears so that when it comes in the interest of west( i used west inrelated context), thinks become legal, otherwise illegal.

Indeed, the fatwas are either condemned or praised depending on whose interest it serves.

On the other hand, one could say that a fatwa against terrorism serves the interest of everyone!
Who wants bomb blasts on their streets? nobody, that's who.

Its an argument between means and ends, it usually boils down to that.
 
.
Yes I agree with that. I fully support said fatwa too :P

However, it is questionable whether this fatwa will have the desired effect on those already resigned to the extremist path.

After all, the real terrorists don't exactly listen to 'moderate' preachers.

Again I think SA you are half right. I agree with you that the hardened black sheeps would not care but what about the simpleton followers who help them in the name of faith. They will most likely keep away from such black sheeps.

Regards
 
.
Again I think SA you are half right. I agree with you that the hardened black sheeps would not care but what about the simpleton followers who help them in the name of faith. They will most likely keep away from such black sheeps.

Regards

Ah well....looks like we both agree.
 
. .
Indeed, the fatwas are either condemned or praised depending on whose interest it serves.

On the other hand, one could say that a fatwa against terrorism serves the interest of everyone!
Who wants bomb blasts on their streets? nobody, that's who.

Its an argument between means and ends, it usually boils down to that.

I agree. terrorism is afterall terrorism.
 
.
In the end those who are considering "freedom fight" or "resistance against oppressors" as terrorist acts. They are mistaking.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom