KS Radhakrishnan, a former vice chancellor of Kaladi University and a state vice president of the BJP, has questioned Sadiq Ali of the Indian Union Muslim League (IUML) on the IUML’s support for the terrorist group Hamas. For Muslims, the only connection to Jerusalem is a mystical nocturnal journey of their Prophet. In a Facebook post, KS Radhakrishnan examined whether Jews and Christians could make a better claim than Islam for the disputed holy site(s) in the Old City area of Jerusalem.
Islamist outfits in Kerala are trying to outdo one another in supporting Hamas and Palestine. Radhakrishnan questioned whether Islamists believe they can invade any location at any time.
“Israel’s war against Hamas is a war against humanity and human rights. So, humanitarians around the world should stand with Hamas. India has always stood by Palestine and should continue to do so. Israel’s conquest of Palestine is the root cause of the war. Therefore, the people of Israel must end the war and vacate the region” – this is the gist of Ali’s statement the other day.
Radhakrishnan had a few hard-hitting questions for Ali.
Are human rights only for those who belong to the terrorist organization Hamas? Hamas uses guerrilla and covert warfare by suicide squads. Forty innocent babies were killed the other day because they were Israeli Jews.
Hamas has taken several citizens hostage. And they have killed more than six hundred people already. Don’t the babies and innocents killed like this have human rights? Why are you silent about their human rights?
It is a fundamental principle that those who want human rights should not commit violence. Those who seek justice must do justice. Hamas indulges in violence, injustice, killing, and looting. Yet the Muslim League demands that others make concessions to Hamas in the name of human rights. Where is the sense of justice in this logic?
Ali argues that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is the cause of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Is this argument correct? Is the part of Palestine exclusive to Sunni Muslims? Wasn’t Muhammad born seven centuries after the birth of Christ?
Abrahamic Jews and Christians existed before Islam. The disputed area was where Moses, a descendant of Abraham, settled his descendants. Therefore, for the Jews, Jerusalem is their homeland and holy land. How can the land belong to Muslims before Islam was born?
For Christians, Jerusalem is the place where Jesus was crucified and resurrected. Muslims’ only connection to Jerusalem is a mystical nocturnal journey of their prophet. Shouldn’t the Jews and Christians lay claim to this land than the Muslims?
Islamists argue that the occupation of Palestine, which includes Jerusalem, the holy land of Muslims, cannot be justified by the Jews. Using the logic of the same argument, how can the invasion of Muslims, after thousands of years, be explained in the same area where Jews and Christians used to live?
Or do Islamists believe that they can conquer any region anytime, anywhere? What sense of justice and logic is there in thinking that the intrusion of one party is right and the encroachment of another group is wrong?
Do Islamists accept the existence of nations based on religion? There are about 53 Islamic countries in the world. There are many more Christian countries. If they can all exist, can’t Judaism, the religion that preceded these two religions, also have a country?
Israel is the only country for the Jews. How can Muslims argue that all other religions can have lands of their own and Jews should not? What is the argument, and what is its logic? (Incidentally, (even after ten years in power), is the BJP yet to acknowledge that Hindus do not have a country of their own?)
As such, we in Bharat live in a democratic society. Such questions must be answered in a republican culture. Ali’s perspective is against the stand taken by our country. Religious consciousness prompts you to do so. The foundation of democracy is debate. Irrational positions can make any discussion seem absurd. Do not forget that.
Answers are awaited…
