Barbaric, Heinous: Muslims Condemn Pahalgam Attack
"Killing innocent tourists in Pahalgam is highly condemnable. It is a barbaric act and a heinous crime. The culprits should be punished and brought to justice. Violence against innocent people, in whichever form, irrespective of caste, creed, and religion, is condemnable. Only pathetic minds can do such acts," said Hamid Bin Khalid Qureshi, secretary, Centre for Social Research and Empowerment (CSRE).
Maulana Abdul Karim Parekh Academy chairman Majid Parekh said the academy strongly denounces the horrific terrorist attack claiming 28 innocent lives. "This cold-blooded act was not merely a display of terror but a dastardly assault on humanity itself. Let there be no doubt: These killers stand for no religion, and certainly not for Islam. They are betrayers of every sacred principle of faith and morality. The deliberate distortion of jihad to rationalise such atrocities is not only a profound misrepresentation, but a grave spiritual transgression. True jihad is a personal, ethical pursuit of justice and righteousness — never a justification for slaughtering innocents," he said.
Parekh added, "The academy remains unwavering in its stand — for truth, peace, and justice. Terrorism may shake us, but it will never break our resolve."
Life coach and corporate trainer Khwaja Sajid said no religion whatsoever approves of cruelty and atrocity against humanity, irrespective of faith it pursues and follows.
Aftab Alam Khan, secretary, Falah Social Organisation, said, "We strongly condemn the massacre of tourists in Pahalgam. The govt must ensure relief and assistance to the families of the victims."
Educationist and scholar Shazia Khan said, "I stand in solidarity with the victims and their families. Terrorism is a complex issue driven by politics, ideology, or extremism, rather than faith."
Abdul Rauf Sheikh, president, CSRE, said, "Our heartfelt condolences to the families of the victims. This is a highly atrocious and horrific crime, and it must be condemned at all levels and in the strongest words. We stand together against terrorism."
Retired banker Irshad Ahmed Khan said, "We pray for peace in our beloved country."
English professor Ayub Khan said, "The Quran condemns it. Killing an innocent person is like killing the entire humanity, and saving a life is like saving humanity."
Professor (retd) Aqueel Khan said Islam forbids and strongly condemns killing of innocent civilians; in fact, such acts against non-combatants are prohibited.
Former NU professor Moiz Mannan Haq said, "There can be nothing but condemnation for the barbaric act in Pahalgam. It is all the more reprehensible if it was done in the name of religion. The administration must act swiftly to catch the real culprits, not scapegoats, and ensure that harsh and exemplary punishment is meted out to them.
Meanwhile, we as common citizens must stick together against this handful of madmen who have no right to representanyreligion."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
36 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Dinkar Srivastava's ‘Pakistan: Ideologies, Strategies and Interests' is an examination of the ideologies that shaped Pakistan's foreign and domestic policies
Dinkar Srivastava is an IFS officer whose knowledge of our neighbour, Pakistan, is complete and exhaustive. He worked at the Indian Consulate in Karachi in the early '90s, personally met many of the people who shaped the history of that country and even had encounters, on a couple of occasions, with ISI operatives masquerading as unknown gunmen. His new book, 'Pakistan: Ideologies, Strategies and Interests', examines the ideologies that shaped the country's foreign and domestic policies. Pakistan army chief Asim Munir, in his speech on July 16, emphasised a 'superior ideology' that includes, but is not limited to, the Two-Nation Theory. The military positions itself as the defender of both territorial and ideological borders, having ruled Pakistan frequently, directly or indirectly. However, its legitimacy is under scrutiny, particularly highlighted by the unrest of May 2023 when crowds attacked military installations as the economy faced the risk of default. The narrow tax base and focus on military strategy over socio-economic development have exacerbated these issues. The book begins by analysing Pakistan's ideologies, tracing them from the pre-Partition period through pivotal moments such as Muhammad Ali Jinnah's August 11, 1947, speech, the 1949 Objectives Resolution and various constitutional developments. The term 'ideologies of Pakistan' reflects the plurality of ideas that have influenced its formation. Although there is no singular definition of Pakistan's ideology, its implications are significant in legal and political contexts, drawing on contributions from figures like Sir Syed Ahmad, Jinnah and Abul A'la al-Maududi, the latter's influence being understated despite his initial opposition to Pakistan's creation. The narrative of a separate Muslim identity laid the groundwork for Pakistan's demand, mainly propelled by the Muslim elite who sought to regain political power as the British rule waned. The book discusses the Two-Nation Theory and pivotal events leading to Partition, including the Lahore Resolution and the Cripps and the Cabinet Missions. Liberals often laud Jinnah's August 11 speech as a vision for an inclusive Pakistan, while the establishment tends to downplay it. The author also juxtaposes this with the perspective of those advocating for a united India. Further sections delve into the intersection of faith and politics through the Objectives Resolution that established divine sovereignty in governance, undermining parliamentary supremacy and minority rights. It also reviews the Munir Commission's findings regarding the anti-Ahmadi riots and explores the disenfranchisement of East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), reflecting ongoing struggles for minority rights in the country. The conflict between ideology and nationality is integral to understanding Pakistan's formation, especially since the imposition of a singular national identity led to discontent in various regions, particularly East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) . The language issue further complicated this, as Urdu was prioritised over Bengali, fueling resentment. Pakistan's military considers itself both a protector of the nation and the custodian of its ideological tenets. Its strategy, involving claims of seeking 'strategic depth' in Afghanistan, often conflicts with rational military logic. After 9/11, significant shifts in policy reflected a tactical choice necessary for survival, leading to a complicated relationship with Islamist groups. Despite receiving substantial US aid, Pakistan's policies undermined the prospects of establishing a stable and democratic Afghanistan. The discourse surrounding Kashmir aligns ideological claims of the unfinished agenda of Partition with territorial ambitions. Pakistan's economic struggles, exacerbated by high military spending and inequitable resource distribution, challenge both its stability and development. The narrative around leadership, particularly under Imran Khan, intertwines with religious rhetoric and an erosion of the secular legacy of the National Awami Party of Wali Khan in Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa. In the concluding chapters, the book questions the viability of Pakistan's ideology in addressing urgent contemporary challenges such as urban development and climate change. It synthesises historical speeches and debates, offering insights into the ideologies foundational to the state while recognising the broader international and domestic contexts shaping its trajectory over time. The book is based on speeches of Iqbal, Jinnah and Muslim League leaders to understand the ideology on which they based their conception of a State for 'Muslim India'. It uses international and Indian sources that must be considered in any discussion of the Partition of the sub-continent. The post-Independence journey is primarily based on Pakistani sources. The author has also made use of material available in the US Library of Congress and the UN Library. He has drawn upon the writings of two eminent jurists — Justice Muhammad Munir and Justice Dorab Patel. The former represented Pakistan in the Boundary Commission, headed the Munir Commission on anti-Ahmadiyya riots and became a member of Ayub Khan's Cabinet. Patel was the dissenting judge in the Zulfikar Ali Bhutto trial. Srivastava has also drawn upon Urdu writings, including Sir Syed Ahmad Khan's 'Asbab-e-Baghawat-e-Hind', 'Muttahida Qaumiyat' by Maulana Madani and 'Shahab Nama' by Qudrat Ullah Shahab. Overall, this is a highly informative, well-written book that explores, in depth, the ideological moorings and philosophy of Pakistan and the manner in which it has influenced relations with India since the Independence of both countries. The writer is former Cabinet Secretary of India
The Hindu
an hour ago
- The Hindu
Rahul Gandhi pleads not guilty in Pune court in defamation case over comments on Savarkar
The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha was represented by his lawyer in court Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Friday (July 11, 2025) pleaded not guilty in a Pune court in a defamation case pertaining to his comments on Hindutva ideologue V.D. Savarkar. Judicial Magistrate (First Class) and Special Judge (MP/MLA court) Amol Sriram Shinde read out the charge, levelled by Satyaki Savarkar, a grandnephew of V.D. Savarkar, to which Mr. Gandhi pleaded not guilty through his lawyer Milind Pawar. The Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha was not present in the court and his lawyer Mr. Pawar pleaded not guilty on his behalf before the court. The judge, during the recording of the plea, asked whether the accused has received copies of the complaint and accompanying documents, to which Mr. Pawar said 'yes'. On the second question on whether the accused has understood the particulars of the offence levelled against him, the defence lawyer replied in the affirmative. On the third and last question, which was "do you plead guilty", Mr. Pawar replied "no, I do not plead guilty" on Mr. Gandhi's behalf. Advocate Sangram Kolhatkar, who is representing Mr. Satyaki Savarkar, said since the phase of recording of plea of the accused was over, the trial in the case would proceed now. Mr. Satyaki Savarkar had approached a court here in April 2023 with a criminal defamation complaint against Mr. Gandhi accusing him of making false allegations against the Hindutva ideologue during his address in London in March 2023. As per the complaint, Mr. Gandhi had allegedly told the gathering that Savarkar had written a book in which the latter stated that he and his five to six friends were beating a Muslim man and he (Savarkar) felt happy. As per Mr. Satyaki Savarkar's complaint, Mr. Gandhi's statement about V.D. Savarkar was false, malicious, and aimed at insulting him. "The matter pertaining to the defamation case against Rahul Gandhi was fixed for recording of plea. Today, I approached the court moving an application that permission be granted to record the plea on behalf of my client. The court allowed the application and on behalf of Mr. Gandhi, I pleaded not guilty before the court," advocate Mr. Pawar told PTI Videos. As per the procedure, the judge read out the charge against Mr. Gandhi pertaining to his disputed speech in London to which the defence counsel pleaded not guilty, he said. Mr. Pawar added that the next hearing has been posted for July 29. Mr. Kolhatkar said considering the delay in recording the plea of the accused, the court instructed the defence to record the plea. "Since Mr. Gandhi has been given permanent exemption from attending the trial physically, his lawyer pleaded not guilty on Mr. Gandhi's behalf. The phase of recording of the plea is over and the case will now proceed for trial. On behalf of the complainant, we will be producing our witnesses and evidence. The defence will have an opportunity to cross-examine them," Mr. Kolhatkar explained.
Hans India
3 hours ago
- Hans India
Why single out Hindi while accepting English & Urdu, asks AP Dy CM Pawan Kalyan
Hyderabad: Andhra Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister Pawan Kalyan questioned adopting double standards towards Hindi while accepting English, Urdu, and Persian. On Friday, he addressed as the chief guest at a national meet 'Dakshin Samvad' organized under the aegis of the Department of Official Languages marking the Golden Jubilee Celebrations, attended by Union Minister for Coal and Mines, G Kishan Reddy, and Rajya Sabha Deputy Chairman Harivansh Narayan Singh, senior offials of the DOL, and scholars of Hindi language from the Southern States. The AP Deputy Chief Minister has said that blind opposition to Hindi is not rational. He pointed out, 'We learn German, Japanese, and other foreign languages for employment opportunities. Similarly, we seize opportunities in the Information Technology sector by learning English. Particularly in times when language is no longer a barrier to education, employment, or business, blind opposition to Hindi could hinder the progress of future generations.' He questioned, 'When we can speak English comfortably, why do we hesitate and fear speaking Hindi?' Taking another dig at the opposition to Hindi raised in certain quarters of South India, he noted that 31 percent of South Indian movies are being dubbed into Hindi, which generates significant revenue. 'People want Hindi for business and to gain popularity on social media, but politics arises when it comes to learning the language.' He recalled that the former President of India, Abdul Kalam, was a Tamil but had a great appreciation for Hindi. He emphasized that language should unite people rather than create divisions. 'The world is working to create divisions, while we are trying to find a language that brings everyone together.' Union Minister G Kishan Reddy said that under the leadership of PM Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah, a golden period is going on for Indian languages. In the last decade, the National Department has done various works to increase the activity of other Indian languages including Hindi.
