Zakir Naik & Terrorism

by Terence A. Anthony


So in recent news the Indian government wanted to dissect speeches given by popular Muslim preacher, Zakir Naik. This was mainly because individuals involved in the Dhaka attacks were inspired by the preacher's idea of Jihad and videos of him encouraging people to "terrorize the terrorizer." Of course, he was referring to the good ol' USA.

However to criminalize his speech is probably the stupidest thing to do at this point.

His supporters will only see this as another attack on their religion and act upon it. I support Zakir Naik's right to say stupid and inflammatory things, because it exposes his stupidity. There are people who are ISIS sympathizers too, but they remain as sympathizers.

Freedom of speech also includes the freedom for idiots to express themselves. This does not rob us from the ability to criticize his speeches. This is something, I personally hope will get into their heads too so that in the instance (and I also hope not) these sympathizers get into power, they understand that our criticisms are valid views. Not happy about it? Debate it.

I want to have the freedom to say that Zakir Naik is irresponsible. Him not calling out Al Qaeda and maintaining plausible deniability is not recognizing the extent of his actions. He, as a person who supposedly represents his branch of Islam should understand how his words are going to be interpreted. Any space for interpretation could lead to disaster.

I want to live in a society where I can do the above without me being threatened. At worst, probably some random guy saying I will end up in the deepest pits of hell.

Criminalizing Zakir Naik for a few irresponsible things he said wouldn't help my case when his fans get into politics.