If we rationalise terror,can we fight it?

“Islamic terror comes to the streets of India.”

This is how captured the terror

attack in Mumbai.

 
The attack has claimed 52 lives.

 The wounded may still swell the list of dead.

 In ten terror strikes on Mumbai

 in last one year more than 100 persons have perished.

 Yes, jehadi Pakistan wants India destabilised,

 even dismembered.

Not just that.

Last week,

 a BBC analyst said that Pakistan’s agenda is not
limited to a part of Kashmir.

Or

even the whole of it.

It aims at larger India, targets at Islamising it.

There are websites showing how an Islamised
India‘s geography will look like.

 Pakistan’s intents are known.

But terror in India is not accomplished

by the expertise of Pakistan alone.

That is only one half of the story.

Let us look at the pillars of Islamist terror in India.

First, at the heart of the terror is extremist Islam.

Islam is not a single creed.

Its hues range from the Sufi,

which is Advaita, to the Jihadi, which is terror.

Some hues of Islam are based on hate.

 Heard of Wahabi Islam and
Deobandi Islam?

 These brands openly promote hate.

They are not illegitimate creeds in Islam.

 But legitimate ones, reverently followed by millions.
Wahabi Islam is Saudi in origin .

But the Deobandi evolved in India.

Post partition it converted

a Muslim-majority Pakistan into an Islamic State.

It inspired and shaped the Taliban.

These are undisputed facts.

Islamic scholars admit this.

Yet in India there cannot be any open debate about
Deobandi Islam.

 That is, the victim of this dangerous Islamic creed cannot
debate, criticise and expose it.

 Not just that.

It is a respected creed.

Sonia Gandhi eulogised as a great

`secular leader’ its previous head, Ali Mian,

who had said just a year before that Muslims could not pray for
India‘s victory in Kargil war

as that would contravene the principles of Jihad.

If you legitimise the thought that

promotes terror what can stop terror?

Next, look at the schools that train the

Jihadis _ the madarsas.

Many of these are factories of terror.

 In the West, madarsas are targeted for correction.

Why, even Islamic Pakistan does it.

Indonesia too does it.

So does Malaysia.

Our secular governments have all information about the
anti-national activities of many madarsas.

Yet they cannot act against these terror factories.

 Why?

 The `seculars’ will set upon the governments that act.

 Imagine the seculars’ scream when the UP government wanted a
registration of the madarsas in border areas only?

If secularism protects
Jihad factories, can terrorism be contained?

Then comes the terror infrastructure _ the gun runners,

the hosts, the handlers, the facilitators,

 the financiers, the SIMIs and finally the ISI.
Intelligence records show that

 an MP from Bihar carried guns for terrorists.
Look at the terror funding.

A Dubai-based Mafia is helping to mix naphtha
with petrol and makes hundreds of crores a year in cash,

most of which is believed to finance terror.

Drug lords, who rely on crime and terror for
retailing their wares, double as businessmen.

Legitimised crime has compromised

 many political parties and their leaders.

 Why, even sections of media.

Thus weakening the national will to fight terror.

 Added to this, a false sense of security is being

created through anecdotes like Noor’s
treatment in India and visits of MPs from and to Pakistan.

False security is an open invitation to terror.

Look at our public discourse.

Even naming Pakistan as the terror merchant is
seen as politically incorrect.

 Some `intellectuals’ even say it is not Pakistan,

but, the oppression of minorities in India by VHPs

which activates terror against India!

How reckless?

 Why then does Islamic terror strike at
Pakistan,

 at the US,

 at Russia,

at Indonesia,

and at the rest and even at
Saudi Arabia

where no VHP is inviting them to strike?

Yet, they counsel,
terrorists are not to blame, nor extremist Islam.

 VHP triggers terror, they charge.

 Madarsas are pious schools, they assert.

Debating violent Islamic creeds is anti-secular, they aver.

 No terror,

just the angry acts of the
oppressed, they conclude.

This is secular politics.

In short, they rationalise terror itself.

If we rationalise terror, can we fight it.

We cannot.

Responses