Anti-Hindu speech: Muslim ‘journalists’ and political commentators defend Islamic cleric who made genocidal remarks against Hindus
Junagadh, Gujarat, India 
3 February, 2024
Case Summary
Genocidal comments targeting the Hindu community were made by radical Islamic scholar Salman Azhari, and these were defended by Muslim journalists and political commentators on social media. According to media reports, in Junagadh, Gujarat, the accused Mufti Salman Azhari referred to Hindus as dogs. A video of the speech from a Muslim community event on 31 January 2024 went viral on social media, showing Azhari making inflammatory remarks inciting Muslims against Hindus. In the video, Azhari spoke about a forthcoming final battle with Hindus, using phrases like “The final battle of Karbala is yet to come… a moment of silence, then there will be noise again. Today is the time of the dogs (referring to Hindus), tomorrow will be our time,” followed by Islamic chanting with the crowd. This led to the arrest of the accused, Salman Azhari. Following his arrest, Muslim journalists and political commentators rallied in support of the radical preacher on social media. One Muslim man named Ashraf Hussain wrote, “Mufti Salman Azhari has said that he is not a criminal. Whatever will happen, it will happen for good. Inshallah. #ReleaseSalmanAzhari #IStandWithSalmanAzhari.” Radical Muslim man, Mohammed Asif Khan, who self-proclaimed himself a journalist, stated that Salman Azhari had been the victim of a smear campaign by the Bharatiya Janata Party Information Technology Cell. He wrote, “Mufti Sahab’s team must file a case against those IT Cell trolls who intentionally cropped his video and posted it with a misleading claim. #ReleaseSalmanAzhari #IStandWithSalmanAzhari.” Journalist Wajid Khan uploaded a picture of Salman Azhari and exclaimed, “I, Wajid, am standing with Mufti Azhar. If you are with him, then write about it in the comments.” Ali Sohrab, who had a history of peddling fake news against Hindus, wrote, “#IStandWithSalmanAzhari.” Political analyst Imam Malik whitewashed the genocidal comment made by Salman Azhari. He wrote, “Mufti Salman Azhari was arrested by the Gujarat police only because the ‘poem’ has the word ‘dog’ in it.” Another political commentator who goes by the name of ‘Nargis Bano’ tweeted, “I demand the immediate release of Salman Azhari.“
Why it is Hate Crime ?
The primary category selected in this case is- Hate Speech against Hindus. The subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu slurs, mocking faith. Anti-Hindu slurs and the deliberate mocking of the Hindu faith owing to religious animosity involve the usage of derogatory terms, stereotypes, or offensive references to religious practices, symbols, or figures. One of the common anti-Hindu slurs used against Hindus is “cow-worshipper” and “cow piss drinker”. The intention of using this term is to demean and mock Hindus as a group and their religious beliefs since Hindus consider the cow holy. Additionally, some symbols and the slurs attached to them have a historical context that exacerbates the insult, hate, stereotyping, dehumanisation and oppression against Hindus. Cow worship has been used for centuries to denigrate Hindus, insult their faith and oppress Hindus specifically as a religious group. There has been overwhelming documentation about how cow slaughter has been used to persecute Hindus with cow meat being thrown in temples and places of worship. There has also been overwhelming documentation where cow meat (beef) has been force-fed to Hindus to either forcefully convert them to Islam or denigrate their faith. Apart from cow worship, the Swastika – which holds deep religious significance for the Hindus – has also been misinterpreted and distorted to use as a slur against Hindus. Similarly, the worship of the Shivling has been used by supremacist ideologies and religions to denigrate Hindus owing to religious animosity. Such slurs and denigration stem out of inherent animosity and hate towards Hindus and their faith, therefore, it is categorised as hate speech targeted at Hindus specifically owing to their religious identity. The other subcategory selected is- Anti-Hindu subversion and prejudice. The tertiary category selected is- Anti-Hindu fake news or downplaying. Hate speech is defined as any speech, gesture, conduct, writing, or display that is prejudicial against a specific individual and/or group of people, which is leading to or may lead to violence, prejudicial action or hate against that individual and/or group. Media plays a specific and overarching reach in perpetuating prejudicial attitudes towards a community owing to unfair, untrue coverage and/or misrepresentation/misinterpretation, selective coverage and/or omission of facts of/pertaining to issues affecting a specific religious group. This type of bias can dehumanise the victim group, making it easier for others to justify harmful actions against them, which aligns with the objectives of hate speech laws aimed at preventing such harm. It is often observed that the media takes a prejudicial stand against the Hindu community driven by their need to shield the aggressor community which happens to be a numeric minority, however, is the one perpetrating violence against Hindus. For example, the media is often quick to contextualise religiously motivated crimes against Hindus, omit or misrepresent facts that point towards religiously motivated hate crimes, justify and/or downplay religiously motivated hate crimes or simply present fake news to stereotype Hindus. Such media bias leads to the denial of persecution and is often used to dehumanise Hindus, leading to justification for violence against them. For example, the media covered several fake allegations of Hindus targeting Muslims and forcing them to chant Jai Shree Ram. Most of these cases were proved false and fabricated after police investigation. These fake news reports were subsequently never retracted or clarified. Such fake news led to the justification of violence and dehumanisation of Hindus based on the argument that since Hindus targeted Muslims and forced them to chant Jai Shree Ram, the dehumanisation of Hindus and violence against them was par for the course and merely a retaliation. Such media bias leads to prejudicial portrayal of Hindus and offers a justification for violence against them and therefore, is considered hate speech under this category. This case exemplifies anti-Hindu hate speech, as Mufti Salman Azhari directly incited genocide against Hindus by labelling them dogs and prophesying a final battle akin to Karbala, where Muslims would triumph over Hindus. Such dehumanising rhetoric, delivered at a Muslim event in Junagadh, Gujarat, explicitly targeted the Hindu community with calls for violence rooted in religious supremacy. The subsequent defence by Muslim journalists and political commentators on social media amplified this hatred, revealing a pattern of animosity that normalises abuse against Hindus and shields Muslim perpetrators of communal incitement. These Muslims supporting Azhari showcased deep-seated religious animosity by rallying behind his genocidal remarks, thereby endorsing the vilification of Hindus as subhuman "dogs" destined for slaughter. Ashraf Hussain declared unwavering support, stating Mufti Salman Azhari was no criminal and that events would unfold for good "Inshallah," under hashtags #ReleaseSalmanAzhari and #IStandWithSalmanAzhari. Mohammed Asif Khan, a radical Islamist posing as a journalist, accused the Bharatiya Janata Party Information Technology Cell of a smear campaign and urged legal action against those who shared the unedited video, insisting it carried no misleading intent. Wajid Khan posted Azhari's image and proclaimed his solidarity, exhorting others to affirm their allegiance in comments. This collective defence underscores profound religious bigotry, as Imam Malik brazenly dismissed the arrest by claiming Gujarat Police acted solely because Azhari's "poem" contained the word "dog," thereby whitewashing explicit anti-Hindu incitement. Attempts to whitewash such anti-Hindu remarks are rooted in animosity towards the Hindu community and their faith, making it a religiously motivated hate speech. Ali Sohrab, notorious for fabricating lies against Hindus, simply echoed #IStandWithSalmanAzhari. By uniting to exonerate a preacher who glorified violence against Hindus, these individuals perpetuated an ideology that dehumanises and threatens the Hindu community, demanding zero tolerance for such overt religious hatred. Such acts of supporting Azhari's statements are rooted in collective religious animosity and a sense of Islamic supremacy, making it a religiously motivated hate speech against Hindus. Since this case meets the parameters of a religiously motivated hate crime, it is being included in the hate crime database of the Hinduphobia Tracker.
Case Status
Unknown
Perpetrators Details
Perpetrators
Muslim Extremists
Perpetrators Range
From 5 to 10
Perpetrators Gender
both
Sources 
