Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

Conspiracy Theories
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Politics : Conspiracy Theories
Message Icon Topic: Rushdie(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 12 Next >>
Author Message
Chrysalis
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
bullet Posted: 04 August 2010 at 12:41pm

UK TV - Dr Zakir Naik discussed on The Wright Stuff:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N6Tcgh02X6w&feature=related




"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1789
bullet Posted: 04 August 2010 at 4:14pm
Originally posted by xx__Ace__xx

Can anyone enlighten me as to what scary threat exactly does Zakir Naik possess to the UK?
 
You mean, compared to Salman Rushdie, for instance?  Well, Naik advocates terrorism, and Rushdie does not.


Edited by Ron Webb - 04 August 2010 at 4:14pm
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
truthseeker100
Female Islam
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 68
bullet Posted: 27 August 2010 at 4:34pm
http://irf.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=241:mockery-freedom&catid=44
 
PRESS RELEASE
MOCKERY OF FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION
 

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.

And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1789
bullet Posted: 27 August 2010 at 6:45pm

Quote 1:

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.

First, Naik is relying on his readers and listeners to be "sensible and logical".  Unfortunately many are not, at least not to the degree required to follow Naik's counterintuitive sophistry.  As a public figure, Naik should know better than to say that "all Muslims should be terrorists", no matter how he wants to define the term.  A great many of his audience will take the statement at face value, with disastrous consequences.  We don't need people who make such reckless and dangerous statements, however he may try to explain away their obvious literal meaning.

Second, his defense only gets himself deeper into hot water.  His comparison to Inspector Angre of the Mumbai Police Force (among a group of five officers who have "gunned down more than 300 alleged criminals" -- alleged criminals??) implies that all Muslims should be entitled to use deadly force against robbers (and presumably anyone else whom he decides deserves to be "terrorized").  If this is what Naik believes, then apparently he has no understanding and/or no respect for the rule of law in a civil society.  Inspector Angre is authorized to use force on behalf of the citizens who appointed him; an average Muslim is forbidden by law to any more force than necessary for self-defense.  We don't need public figures telling Muslims they can take the law into their own hands, whether for ideological reasons or for protection of property.


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.

It's hard to believe that Naik could be so ignorant, but if he is then he has no business speaking on such matters in the first place.  Whether or not Bin Laden is directly responsible for 9/11 (a question which no sensible person doubts), he has been quoted in many press releases, fatwas, and media interviews as being fully in support of terrorism (by the common definition, never mind Naik's own peculiar twist).  That in itself should be enough for Naik to express an opinion.

". . . the killing of Americans and their civilian and military allies is a religious duty for each and every Muslim to be carried out in whichever country they are until Al Aqsa mosque has been liberated from their grasp and until their armies have left Muslim lands." (Bin Laden fatwa, 1998)

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.

It is also not necessary to link them.  It is enough to read them and understand them.  "If he is terrorizing the terrorist, if he is terrorizing America the terrorist, the biggest terrorist, he’s following Islam."  Again, Naik apparently does not understand that terrorism is wrong even to fight terrorism. 

It is easy to make the case that America is indeed engaged in terrorist activities around the globe.  I have no doubt that it's true, although my examples would probably not be the same as Naik's.  Therefore the premise of Naik's statement is true, and the conclusion follows that (according to Naik) it's okay to commit terrorist acts on Americans.  That is not a message we need preached in civilized society.
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
truthseeker100
Female Islam
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 68
bullet Posted: 27 August 2010 at 7:35pm

Ron,

First of all, you must read in entirety before making such dastardly allegations. In the law, one is innocent until proven guilty.

I merely posted with regards to what Dr. Zakir Naik has described himself in his defense.   Nobody has the right to pass baseless and ignorant conclusion; let the court and judiciary deal with that.

And I am not interested in repetitive argumentation, please.

And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5
IP IP Logged
truthseeker100
Female Islam
Groupie
Groupie
Avatar

Joined: 12 February 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 68
bullet Posted: 27 August 2010 at 7:38pm
And, behold, with every hardship comes ease:
Qur'an 94: 5
IP IP Logged
Chrysalis
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 25 November 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2041
bullet Posted: 28 August 2010 at 7:02am


Wow thanks for the share Sis! Very interesting!

I was surprised to see Mahesh Bhatt of all people speaking out in favor of Zakir Naik. For those who may not know, he is a very famous film director in India - and is known was his 'liberal' & sometimes scandalous movies. On top of that, he was born to a Hindu father & Shia mother, and himself is secular. That makes him an extremely unlikely candidate to voice support for Zakir Naik, since Zakir Naik represents the religious Muslim voice, often considered a threat by people in his line of work & background.

The fact that he is voicing his support for Zakir Naik speaks volumes about how "extremist" Zakir Naik is, or what is his perception as a Muslim scholar in Hindu-dominated India.

Since the average (non-Indian/) non-Muslim knows Zakir Naik through the UK govt's ban and their version of the story - naturally they believe him to be an extremist. When in reality it couldn't be far from the truth.

Zakir Naik may not be the perfect orator, or a perfect person - since nobody is . . . but he is far from a 'terror supporting' extremist. Only someone who has followed all his work would know that. . . .not someone who bases their opinion on an extract by the UK govt. 

Zakir Naik is one of the few public Muslim figures who has made an effort to be 'inclusive' towards  non-Muslims and their scriptures. Something that the extremist muslims have tried to use against him. The average non-muslim may not know, but Zakir Naik has faced a backlash by some extremist muslims who think he is deviant because of his inclusion of nonmuslims & their scriptures. It is for his tolerance for nonmuslims & their scriptures that has gained him a lot of respect in India by Christians, Jews, Jains, Hindus, Buddhists alike.

Again - that is not something likely to make the western news.

"O Lord, forgive me, my parents and Muslims in the Hereafter. O Lord, show mercy on them as they showed mercy to me when I was young."
IP IP Logged
Ron Webb
Male Humanism
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 30 January 2008
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1789
bullet Posted: 28 August 2010 at 8:52am
Originally posted by Chrysalis

Zakir Naik may not be the perfect orator, or a perfect person - since nobody is . . . but he is far from a 'terror supporting' extremist. Only someone who has followed all his work would know that. . . .not someone who bases their opinion on an extract by the UK govt. 
 
If I were to make a public statement that "All Muslims are terrorists", do you think I should be allowed into Pakistan, no matter how I tried to explain it away?  How long do you think I'd even be allowed on this discussion forum if I said things like that?
 
So why should any civilized country tolerate a guy who publicly declares, "All Muslims should be terrorists", no matter how he tries to justify it?  It's an inflammatory, dangerous statement whatever the nuances.
Addeenul ‘Aql – Religion is intellect.
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 12 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com