Terrorist attack on Mumbai: A Tale of debauchery and anti-Islamism

Islam,Terrorism and Jihad

29 Nov 2008, NewAgeIslam.Com

Terrorist attack on Mumbai: A Tale of debauchery and anti-Islamism

It is clear that the terrorists in Mumbai, just as those who hit the WTC in New York, were never driven by the Islamic ideology and so to call them Islamic terrorists or to call their endeavour as Jihad is absolutely wrong and unjustified.  Had it been so they would have been deeply religious at heart and inspired by the theological injunction of Islam which forbids liquor, woman if not married to them, and also killing of innocents. There is a Quranic verse which says that if you kill one innocent person you have killed the whole humanity. Terrorism has no place in Islam and this revelation shows that their ideology is something else and so is their target.  What Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban aim at or these terrorist are doing has nothing to do with Islam. They have their own agenda, their own plan. An analysis by senior Indian journalist S A H RIZVI. ---------------------------------    Terrorist attack on Mumbai: A Tale of debauchery and anti-Islamism   BY S A H RIZVI   Let me first congratulate India TV led by Rajat Sharma for its wonderful coverage of the terror attack on Mumbai.  At the time of writing this piece, the action is on but almost to an end.    The ghastly incident has shocked all of us. This gory incident can never have any place in any civilized society. Like my fellow countrymen, I also weep for the innocents who lost their lives and join them in prayers that these terrorists be exterminated from the face of earth.   But why I thank India TV was its graphic reporting on how the terrorists at Nariman House went to the market in Colaba and bought 20 kilograms of chicken and liquor worth Rs 35,000 to sustain them for three days. Throughout the operation at Nariman Housie these terrorists including one by the name of Imran Babar used to have chicken and consumed liquor and then used to shoot outside at our security forces.   It is also true that his accomplices - the picture shows them as clean shaven and in contemporary attire -  who were holed up in Taj and Oberoi, also consumed liquor.   When the 9/11 volcano erupted in New York and other parts of the US, the terrorist including Mohammed Atta and his group reportedly used to frequent night clubs and bars.  A day before the attack took place Atta is said to have spent the night at a club, drinking, womanizing and enjoying.   All those who hijacked the US passenger aircraft and later rammed into the WTC and the Pentagon building were young, fun loving guys who enjoyed everything fashionable that the Westerners enjoy to the hilt, wining, dining and womanizing.  They even joked about the quantity of liquor each one used to consume a day   The point here is to emphasise that all these terrorists were never influenced by the religious ideology of Islam.  Islam strictly prohibits use of liquor and its consumption; there is a strict punishment provided in the Sharia for the Muslims who do so.  In Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait, Qatar, etc. liquor shops are banned.   It is clear that the terrorists in Mumbai, just as those who hit the WTC in New York, were never driven by the Islamic ideology and so to call them Islamic terrorists or to call their endeavour as Jihad is absolutely wrong and unjustified.  Had it been so they would have been deeply religious at heart and inspired by the theological injunction of Islam which forbids liquor, woman if not married to them, and also killing of innocents.   There is a Quranic verse which says that if you kill one innocent person you have killed the whole humanity.   Terrorism has no place in Islam and this revelation shows that their ideology is something else and so is their target.  What Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban aim at or these terrorist are doing has nothing to do with Islam. They have their own agenda, their own plan.   Time and again, it has been said that terrorism has no religion; it has no face or ideology.  The only ideology it has is just to strike terror. The face of a terrorist can belong to a Muslim, a Christian, a Hindu or a Jew. So it is wrong to use the name of Islamic terrorism much the same way as to use the word Hindu or Christian terrorism is obnoxious.   I have always maintained that all religions only guide people to the right path, to goodness, to serve the society.  Tell me of one religion which justifies rape, murder or killing of innocents.   This is one of the reasons why I bitterly opposed Dr Zakir Naik of the Islamic Research Foundation, in my earlier column for NewAgeIslam.com. He openly supports the debauch Yazeed, the second of Omayyad Caliphs who ruled from 680-684 AD, and also Osama bin Laden's terrorism.  Naik's suggestion that all Muslims should be terrorists is absolutely outrageous.   Like these modern day terrorists, Yazeed, a drunkard, womaniser and one who never prayed, used his armour of terrorism to force everyone to accept his version of `Islamic' leadership.  But there were noble souls like Imam Hussein, the beloved grandson of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) who stood against his oppression and digression and sacrificed his life. Today Yazeed is exterminated from the face of earth and Hussein remains an icon for the whole Muslim society.   History repeats itself and I am confident all these terrorists who are now using Islam as their weapon will be wiped out soon.  Surely in the same manner as Yazeed was doomed forever after the battle of Kerbala in 680.   Apparently, terrorism and debauchery go together. The supporters of Osama bin Laden who attacked Mumbai as well as those who attacked New York 0n 9/11 were also debauch in the manner of the accursed Yazid. Hats off to Rajat Sharma's India TV once again for exposing this fact that other media have failed to bring out in the open.   S A H RIZVI is a senior Indian journalist, former editor of Delhi Midday. http://newageislam.org/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1028