Such ‘Shaheeds’ will turn India into Pakistan

Asaduddin Owaisi and Mukhtar Ansari

Asaduddin Owaisi, National President of the All India Majlis-E-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) and MP, openly praised mafia don Mukhtar Ansari in a campaign meeting in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, on 26th April. He did not stop at this, but also called Mukhtar Ansari a ‘Shaheed’. Thousands of Muslims present there clapped on his statement.

Being a lawyer, Asaduddin Owaisi has good knowledge of law. He knows very well who Mukhtar Ansari was. Even then, Owaisi supported this criminal, who was accused of several murders and had a criminal record not only in Uttar Pradesh, but also in other States. Mukhtar Ansari was in jail for 18 years. He died in jail last month. His family alleged that the Police poisoned Mukhtar Ansari. If Owaisi also believes this claim, being a lawyer, he should have demanded an inquiry into the matter in a Court; instead, Owaisi presented a devil like Mukhtar Ansari as a ‘Shaheed’ before the Muslims. Owaisi’s politics for Muslim votes will prove to be dangerous for the country in the future; but this is not good for the Muslim community either. Leaders such as Owaisi are leading the Muslim community, which is already at the forefront of criminal activities, further into an abyss. Needless to say, this will be a headache for the country in the future. If Owaisi declares Mukhtar Ansari a ‘Shaheed’, who in fact has gone to Jahannum (Hell) for killing and robbing many people when alive, then such ‘Shaheeds’ and their supporters will lead India towards Pakistan.

A person who follows the path shown by Allah and dies for Islam is called ‘Shaheed’. Many people confuse the word ‘Shaheed’ for ‘martyr’ and address the revolutionaries who sacrificed for the freedom of India, and soldiers of India who sacrificed their lives while protecting the country, as ‘Shaheed’. Revolutionary Bhagat Singh is also given the title of ‘Shaheed’; but according to the definition of ‘Shaheed’ in Islam, none of the above would be a ‘Shaheed’. Rather, calling them ‘Shaheed’ would be an insult to their sacrifice. Owaisi certainly knows the difference between a ‘martyr’ and a ‘Shaheed’. Therefore, there is no doubt that he called Mukhtar Ansari a ‘Shaheed’ in relation to Islam. Even fanatics such as Aurangzeb and Afzal Khan who attacked the Maratha kingdom are considered ‘Alamgir’ (Ruler of the world) and ‘Shaheed’ respectively by Muslims. This is because Owaisi and the Muslim community believe that they gave their lives for Islam. Such people are a threat to India.

Muslim leaders preventing their community’s progress

Muslims have remained economically, academically and socially backward. Hindus are often blamed for this; but the backwardness of Muslims is due to their fanaticism. No one else is responsible for their misery but Muslim leaders such as the Owaisi brothers. Owaisi calling Mukhtar Ansari a ‘Shaheed’ clearly means he is justifying Ansari’s acts of killing and hooliganism. Owaisi has given a message to all the Muslims to follow the path of Mukhtar Ansari, as such a person is Allah’s man (Shaheed).

Muslims do not get modern education, so the Government came up with a plan to provide education other than Quran in the madarasas; but even then, their fanaticism did not reduce. This is because they are led by leaders such as Owaisi. Be it the family of Farooq Abdullah in Kashmir or Abu Azmi in Maharashtra, these Muslim leaders have always set examples of fanaticism for the Muslim community. These leaders cannot be elected based on ethics and development. They can only remain relevant by playing politics in the name of religion. This is why, such leaders have always shown the fear of Hindus to the Muslim community and got Muslim votes in return. As long as the Muslim community has such leaders, no matter how many concessions are given to them as a ‘minority’, the development of Muslims is not possible.

Muslim community has been used as a vote-bank

After Independence, Congress became the face of Muslims. After realising about the Muslim vote-bank, Congress started the politics of Muslim appeasement in India. For many years, Congress elected many candidates with the help of the Muslim vote-bank. Many concessions were also given to Muslims for votes by calling them a ‘minority’ community. These concessions have continued; but in all these years, Muslims have been leading in the field of crime. The involvement of young Muslims in rapes, drug trafficking and murders is also seen in large numbers. Muslims really need to contemplate on this. Realising that Congress used Muslims for its political advantage, leaders such as Owaisi emerged from the Muslim community. If these new leaders really wanted to serve the interests of Muslims, they would have tried to change the criminal mindset of Muslims; but like the Congress, they too are using Muslims only as a vote-bank. Such leaders cannot serve the interests of Muslims.

Muslims are kept under the fear that their existence in India will be threatened if they give up fanaticism; but this is an illusion. Despite being a smaller percentage than Muslims, the Jain and Parsi communities live happily and with dignity in India. Even the thought of converting them to Hindu Dharma does not cross the mind of Hindus. Fundamentally, there is no doctrine of conversion or use of force to spread Dharma in any of the Hindu Scriptures.

Leaders such as Owaisi are leading Muslims to fanaticism. Muslims should understand that this is neither in their interest nor that of the country. In short, fanaticism in the Muslim community is a National problem. The Government must make a serious effort to solve this.

Muslims are kept under the fear that their existence in India will be threatened if they give up fanaticism; but this is an illusion !