Zakir Naik – A Person Kills Millions & Returns to India who Protects him. What Action can be taken against India

Zakir Naik
AI: Summary © A speaker discusses the history of the recent attacks on the United States, including the deaths of people in the US and the loss of thousands of children in India. They also mention the lack of evidence for actions by the US government and the potential loss of lives if the government refuses to provide evidence. The speaker suggests that the government should provide evidence to the Supreme Court and allow the Supreme Court to review the evidence.
AI: Transcript ©
00:00:01 --> 00:00:35

myself is Ravi Kumar, I am a software engineer. And my first request to my fellow Indians is don't always relate September 11 with the terrorism because so many things have happened in India, more than 20,000 people have been killed in Kashmir 2000 Muslim brothers have been killed in Gujarat. So, we have so many instance to link with the terrorism in India itself. Like we can link that into the terrorism and the day in which saddam temple people are interred that we can link it with the terrorism. My

00:00:37 --> 00:01:24

I thank Mr. jagad nih for clearing the misconception about t jihad. My question is that you told that just for the sake of 1%, you cannot attack the country? No, I am asking about the imaginary scenario. Suppose I am going to the some Arab country I'm causing a great devastation I'm killing lakhs and crores of pupils. And I'm coming back to the India and the country is giving a proof to me, who approved Indian Government stating that this person has caused the devastation and the Indian government is repeatedly still telling the terror proof what is given by you is not valid. And that proof is being shared with the other countries. They all agree and suppose the country

00:01:25 --> 00:01:42

repeatedly is not ready to surrender me. Then what is the action that particular country has to take? Well, let let me just I'm not completed. And another thing is the proof of the country is previously also when that kidnapped the plane

00:01:43 --> 00:01:52

interred that they encourage the kidnappers, they are allowed the terrorists who will come in that plane to escape out of the country.

00:01:53 --> 00:02:25

If that is the status of the country, then what is the action that particular country has to take it you are telling suppose I have come after causing a devastation I have come back to India Indian government is not ready to surrender me and the proofs have been given and Indian Government is repeatedly telling the proof what you are given is not valid. What is the action that country has to take? The brother has asked a very good question and a very relevant question. A very good analogy between what's happened during September again, though he came back to live in September.

00:02:28 --> 00:02:40

And Roger very good that he as a person goes and crosses an Arab country, kills 1000s of people devastation comes back and Arab country gives proof to the Indian government Indian Government does not accept.

00:02:41 --> 00:02:50

Mullah Omar again is not my friend. He told us. He told us a give me proof, and the USA government could not give proof they shared it with Tony Blair.

00:02:51 --> 00:03:12

They shared with Musharraf Musharraf is saying that I have got enough proof. I have seen the proof. When you asking the Afghanistan government to give the culprit the Afghanistan government is telling me Please give us proven they could not give proof to Afghanistan government and they're sharing it with Tony Blair. It is illogical. That means there's something fishy in the proof till today, till today.

00:03:14 --> 00:03:57

Till today, Osama bin Laden is prime suspect it fully hypothesis, the proof should be solid proof. And if they're given solid proof that Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan had to hand over osama bin laden with renewed if you do something with Arab country, an Arab country gives proof. And if Indian Government objects, then you can go to the international court of law. Where is the International Court about the new places in case Osama bin Laden? Where is it? Where is it? There are international guidelines. Do you know the rule of international guidelines, if suppose there is an extradition policy between the foreign countries for example, if a person like India and UK have an

00:03:57 --> 00:04:24

extradition policy, if any criminal of India does a crime and goes to UK they can ask for the criminal back and one of the example in Nadeem Nadeem, the music director, the Indian government said that was involved in Wilson's murder. So when they give the proof in UK government in the UK court of law, the UK court of law said a proof is nonsense. They sued the government Indian Government Indian government had to pay the charges of the advocates

00:04:26 --> 00:04:26

have nothing

00:04:28 --> 00:04:37

enough proof they gave. They didn't agree they say approve is not valid, did individual or against UK by an individual man individually.

00:04:40 --> 00:04:59

But the Indian government gave prove at least their us in India proved Ganesan at all. So even now, if you go to us all the land or any Arab land, and if you do something and if Saudi Arabia gives proof here that you are the culprit, even if the Indian government doesn't agree, Saudi government or any

00:05:00 --> 00:05:04

A country cannot bombard the 1 billion Indians. It doesn't give permission.

00:05:05 --> 00:05:34

Islam doesn't give permission that even if you are the culprit, even you have killed 1 million people, they can come and catch you. If they have the power. They can bombard the innocent people. They can't they can't do it. It's not allowed in Islam. Same thing you're saying let's talk about the present scenario in Kashmir, in Gujarat. In absurdum, I say that whatever may be the background, why those two terrorists entered in Islam, you cannot destroy the monastery, you cannot kill the religious people.

00:05:35 --> 00:05:42

When one goes in a monastery, in the place of worship in the temple, and killing innocent people, it is against the Quran.

00:05:43 --> 00:05:55

It is against the Quran, we have to condemn it, just because those two people, whatever the reason was, and they got a letter that they believe they came from teriyaki sauce kisa, the Arabic word

00:05:56 --> 00:06:07

which means you can take revenge. And it felt it was the cause was because maybe their family was killed. Even if their family was killed. They have no right to kill 44 people.

00:06:11 --> 00:06:47

The cause was maybe somebody else, but the action was wrong. Just because somebody killed if they knew the person that killed the family members, if they have gone and taken revenge with that person for separate, how can they kill other 44 people who are innocent. So in Islam also, even if you know who the main culprit is, as I said in my talk in chapter five, verse 32, if anyone kills any other human being, unless it be for murder, or for creating mischief in the land, it is as though Yes, kill the whole of humanity. Only if you know who the person is, if he ran mischief, and then murder, that is the only way that you can kill him for no other reason can kill anyone else. Islam condemns

00:06:47 --> 00:06:49

that as though you have killed all of humanity.

Share Page

Related Episodes