Rebutting Zainab Sikander’s Article Point By Point

Meet Zainab Sikander, the incredibly dumb reporter from the print who just posted an article yesterday about how cartoons were a form of “bullying” and hence a provocation for the beheadings. Here is her article and now this is my point to point rebuttal to it so Here we go :

1) She says Charlie Hebdo was provoking and targeting islam solely with the objectionable cartoons, and tweeted that wait till it mocks mother mary/jews/hindus/LGBT etc .

well what she didn’t mention is; charlie hebdo has mocked every religion, from Hinduism to Christianity to Jewish.

A twitter user pointed it out :

She had also tweeted about how it didn’t mock Hinduism and wait till it does and see how India reacts. Well she definitely didn’t care to provide/know anything about Hebdo’s past works.

charlie hebdo has written an entire article mocking Lord Vishnu. No, nobody got beheaded, none. Here’s a snap

2) She says the attackers that carried out 9/11 had drinks in a bar before attacking, so they can’t be considered muslims. Well, this is mindboggling – by that logic, shouldn’t she and the print stop using words like “Hindutva Extremists”? Or stop calling “Saffron Terror”? Which btw has no base whatsoever as we’ve not seen Hindus behead/kill in the name of Krishna/Rama.

Here’s a snap of her hypocrisy : “Hindutva Agenda”.

No, I’m not targeting any particular faith but if you don’t want religion to be associated with Terrorism then stop using it in all the cases by but that doesn’t suit the outlet she works for ofcourse.

3) She points out other extremist groups like KKK or IRA to say that islamic extremists are not the called out, well she doesn’t seem to know that they get called out all the time by the west, just like they condemn white Supremacists and nazis for the bloodshed during the holocaust.

4) She writes that Macron Projected Islamophobia by not stopping Charlie Hebdo, and that provoked the muslims to do the heinous crime. Well didn’t she just tell to not associate the religion with those people? Then why provoking here matters at all? Shouldn’t it be condemned all out clearly? Then again she says it has nothing to do with religion as “a whole”.

Next she says quotes from Quran are misunderstood by the followers and taken out of context. I Would agree on that because as a non-muslim i don’t know about Quran and can’t just make assumptions on holy books i haven’t read. But that’s what she does next – the worst part.

She quotes Bhagavad Geeta’s verse and twists the meaning shamelessly, here’s what she wrote:

BG 2.33: “अथ चैत्त्वमिमं धर्म्यं संग्रामं न करिष्यसि। ततः स्वधर्मं कीर्तिं च हित्वा पापमवाप्स्यसि। (O Arjuna! If you do not fight for this religion and turn away from your religion, then you will lose your fame and glory).” Surely, Hindus will know the context.

Well, the word “Dharma” doesn’t mean Religion, it means “duty – What’s Right/ A Righteous War”. Probably She’s done a simple copy paste from somewhere to suit her article.

Just when you think that’s the lowest journalists can go, “journalists” from the print never fail to suprise!

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.