Does Terrorism have religion

[Sreekar]

Hi Folks,

Once again, Hyderabad the so called secular state of India had to see one of the worst terror attacks in recent times. No one would have expected that this was coming. So far the official death toll is 44. It would have been even worse if the other 19 timer bombs would have exploded.

At least now, the political parties should stop the blame game and come together and do some brainstorming to solve this present issue – Terrorism.

When I look back I have these unanswerable questions:

Does terror has religion?
Can we curb terror by introducing reservations for the so called minorities?
Can this terror be minimized by introducing POTA?
Why are the terrorists targeting the urban population?

Hope we can have a good discussion which will lead to curb terrorism in India.

God bless India.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[sunil_ias]

HELLO

First of all dont relate terrorism with religion otherwise we will be ending up in serious controversy.

your next thing that can we curb it by the implication of POTA.Let us think over POTA, it s not a magic stick .It was devised by the lawyers, judges,politicians assuming that strict rules and regulation can help curb the activity.But PoTA could be effectively used when we are able to capture and identify the accused.Take an example dont we know the terrorist group and their location, we know but we still can't attack them.Similarily just imagine what will happen if we are unaware of accused.

Your next question is baseless providing reservation to minorities and terrorism, please elaborate it clearly.

Terrorism could be removed only from our participation.All of us should take responsibility that it is we who has still have not taken effective participation and interest , many of us would be more interested in the sanjay and salman case.

[Sreekar]

Hi Sunil,
Thanks much for sharing your views.

Coming to your views:
No hard feelings. I never said terrorism is related to a particular religion. My point is why we find terror related activities being attributed to a particular group. If this is really the case, can this be eradicated by introducing educational benefits such as reservations to uplift the minorities (Ex: As in the case of Andhra Pradesh, the government planning to introduce 4 % of reservations for the minorities). we know the main reason the majority of the youth which is indulging in terrorism activities is due to lack of proper education & jobs.

Regarding POTA, I agree to some extent. Some stringent laws always have some disadvantages as you mentioned but its always better to have some stringent laws in place instead of no anti-terrorism laws.

In your post, you also mentioned that we should take active participation to curb terrorist activities, can you please elaborate how you are planning to do this. I'm looking forward to your views.

Thanks again for being an active participant.

-Regards,
Sreekar

[satish]

Hello,
Nobody is relating the terrorism with religion but certainly some rogue elements are blacking the face of Islam.

Every single incidence of terrorism has some link with some religious elements and i personally believe that some stringent laws like POTA could have averted the Hyderabad like incident.

But in our Secular Democratic Republic of India there is no dearth of politicians who are playing the votebank politics of wooing minority communities.

[chanda_s]

we know the main reason the majority of the youth which is indulging in terrorism activities is due to lack of proper education & jobs.

this myth has been busted long back. we all know how educated and well off the modern terrorists are. the recent bombings in uk have only reconfirmed what we already knew. do you think bin laden became a terrorist because he didnt have a job?

[harshabanad]

To officer chanda.....

The acts of terrorism are of different kinds: It could be because of ideological, religious, political or for simply no reason at all. In 1995, when the Japanese cult 'aum shinrikyo' attacked the Tokyo subway with nerve agent Sarin, they killed more than a dozen and injured thousands. Their motive was to propagate their ideology, different from other religions. From then to now, terrorist activities have taken place because of different reasons. In the recent past, especially in the last two-tree years, the main agends behind terrorist attacks in India, seems to create general panic and sense of lawlessness in the state. The idea behind recent terror attacks is to confuse the state hence even in their attacks, their targets are different and explosives used are not similar. Their criteria for attacks is not fixed. Surprise is an element of terror attacks. Sometimes if it a common market place, sometimes it is a conference os scientists which are targetted.
Here, in the Indian context, one needs to bifurcate between ' Islamic extremism' and 'Terrorism' as a whole. In a discussion with friends, one said -" not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslims".Now that brings religion into picture.The thing that is very important to be discussed is that -All fundamental muslims believe in the "rule of god" while all others believe in the " Rule of Law". Whether religion leads to the making of a particular type of ideology or not is a further point to be deliberated.
And on the psychological level, people who end up as terrorists are those who feel they are left out in the society. They do not have an identity in the society and what the terrorist groups give them, is an identity. A typical muslim family goes like this.... poverty ridden, more children and less care, father betraying the family etc etc. Out of this, one son works in a garage, abused and not at all cared, neither by his garage owner nor the society. In such a situation, the son is looking for a break to make an identity( or money). This is where the terror groups cash in.Ultimately they(terrorists) are only pawns in the big game and terrorism for them is a job opportunity better than a garage.
Also, the recent attacks in Glasgow re-affirms how important ideology is in the making of a terrorist. All talks end up in the conclusion that terrorists are pessimistic people, highly depressed and ready to die for their cause, because they believe they can make a change only by their death

what say officer chanda?

[Sreekar]

this myth has been busted long back. we all know how educated and well off the modern terrorists are. the recent bombings in uk have only reconfirmed what we already knew. do you think bin laden became a terrorist because he didnt have a job?

Chanda Sir,
I agree to some extent. Most of the terrorist activities around the world are being led by people who are well off and educated. But, don't we know that most of the people who are being part of this deadly act - terrorism mainly in India are not so well off as laden.

Coming to Laden, he had his own reasons of terrorism (the soviets attack's on Afghanistan, the terrorist attacks on Mecca and the U.S presence in the Arab world). But one important thing we all are forgetting to mention here is the people who are carrying this out in the field. Most of them are not economically better off.

I should have been clearer in my post. According to me, Terrorism is mainly caused due to Economic conditions. The other reasons: Political, Religious & Idealogical are already mentioned by harshabanad in his earlier post.

I personally feel that, Economic conditions play a major role in the act of terrorism. Andhra Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Bihar are prime examples. The economic factors include the absence of land reforms, rural unemployment, exploitation of landless labourers by land owners, etc. These economic grievances and perceptions of gross social injustice have given rise to ideological terrorist groups such as the various Marxist/Maoist groups operating under different names.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[Sreekar]

In a discussion with friends, one said -" not all muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are muslims".

Harshabanad,
A gentle disagree with your friends statement. I think there is no religious scripture that does not condemn terrorism. How about the attacks that took place aftermath of Mumbai 1993 blasts. How about Gujurat attacks? Do you agree.

-Thanks much,
Sreekar

[chanda_s]

i think that there is something that is more dangerous than terrorism. and that is appeasement of terrorism by way of overlooking it. talking specifically of islamic terrorism, i feel that lack of education, employment etc are not the real reasons behind it. i see more numbers of hindus who are uneducated and unemployed in the country but dont take upto terrorism as a philosophy. if we continue to ignore the real reason just to fall in line with some ill-conceived notions of secularism, we can never solve the problem. and thats simply because our basic assumptions are wrong.

one can understand if the assumptions of the politicians are incorrect; they have their own compulsions. but fair thinking youth of this country need not hide behind a self drawn curtain of secularism.

the fact simply remains that there is a section of hardcore minority in the muslim populace that tries to whip up religious frenzy among the community for vested interests. religion is a volatile thought. a man doesn't fight for shelter but if aroused, he fights unto death for his religion. and thats what is being used by the hard core elements with direct support from outside the country.

thats what is happening in hyderabad and elsewhere in the country. unless we have enough guts to come down heavily on the unscrupulous elements without fear of backlash from any community, we cannot solve the problem.

the educated middle class of india is more worried about condemning the violence of the majority community but is for the same reasons mentioned above, silent about condemning the violent acts of the minority. ever wondered why the attack on mf hussain's show still finds a place in indian english press but te news of the life threatening attack on taslima nasreen has already died its natural death? violence is to be condemned - whether it is by majority or minority. selective highlighting or ignoring enboldens the unscrupulous elements that they can get away with anything.

this is a thought process that doesnt find favour with many mostly because we have been brought up in a particular school of thought since the last 150 years. i say 150 years because it started in 1857 when bahadurshah zafar was proclaimed the monarch of india when his power hardly extended beyond his palace.

[farzana]

i think i am inclined to agree with Mr. Chanda_s. but one thing that everyone must understand is that there are voices within the community that are vehemently opposed to the hardcore elements. it is just that they are not heard. may be they are too feeble.

thanks. farzana sayyad