Abusaleh Shariff explodes the myth of Muslims doing better under Modi ruleAyodhya Verdict: A lesson for the coming generation
Submitted by admin4 on 1 October 2010 - 5:52pm
By Soroor Ahmed, TwoCircles.net,
Though the September 30 Allahabad High Court verdict is too legal to be analysed in simple terms its one important fall-out is that it provided an opportunity to make the young generation aware of what actually happened in the tumultuous 5-6 years of the Ram Janambhoomi movement.
Even in this age of information explosion a large number of Hindu and Muslim youths under the age of 20 were, till a month back, totally unaware of what actually happened on, before and after December 6, 1992 -- the day the structure was brought down by a mob of thousands led by BJP leaders Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharati. That was not enough. The rampaging mob then went on killing and maiming Muslims and destroying their property. At places innocent passengers were thrown from the running trains or killed on roads while on way to home.
L.K. Advani ON the Somnath-Ayodhya rath yatra of 1991 [Photo: The Hindu]
The court judgement of September 30 does not in any way exonerate the killing of thousands of innocent men, women and children on the run-up to the movement to demolish the structure. Even several Hindus were killed in police firing when earlier attempt was made on Babri Masjid during the chief ministership of Mulayam Singh Yadav.
What happened from Bhagalpur in October 1989 to Surat in December 1992 (where Muslim women were stripped naked and paraded during the riots) to Mumbai in December1992-January 1993 was virtually blacked out by a large section of the media in the later years. The Lucknow Special Court ruling prompted the media to recall some of those facts before the people.
Till a few weeks back the upcoming generation was aware of what happened on March 12, 1993 in Mumbai, where serial blasts killed around 250 innocent people. But they were hardly aware of what actually happened in months and years preceding that incident. Now they have become aware of both the heinous crimes against humanity––not just one.
The verdict, in no way, justified the demolition when the case relating to it was sub-judice and when one of the party was ready to accept the court judgement from the very beginning.
Though Muslims were mostly the victims of the prolong movement, the tragedy is that the older generation of the community failed to pass on to the Gneration-Next what actually transpired, who conspired, who whipped up mass hysteria and provocked the general people and who played the heroic role in safeguarding the secular character of the country.
Uma Bharti in jubilant mood after the demolition of Babri Masjid on 6th December 1992 [Photo: OutlookIndia]
For example, even the harshest critic among Muslims of Mulayam Singh Yadav and Lalu Yadav are now forced to recall their contributions to the cause of secularism when they were the chief ministers of the respective states. They were the two men who, then stood the test of the time. And that too when most of the so-called secular elements in the Congress were hand-in-glove with the communalists. The Left too did not play much important role in resisting the movement as one expected them to do. This in spite of the fact that the local MP of Faizabad between November 1989 and May-June 1991 was Mitrasen Yadav of the Communist Party of India. Ayodhya falls under Faizabad parliamentary constituency. It was in 1991 election that Vinay Katiyar of the Bajrang Dal won on the BJP ticket. Mitrasen later joined the Samajwadi Party.
The only exception among the Left is the CPI ML (Liberation), whose cadres came out strongly in their fight against the saffron brigade in a few places in North India.
As the verdict provided an opportunity to debate and discuss in media the whole chain of events it also gave an idea to the coming generation about the gravity of the situation. The fear, panic and uncertainity which gripped the country in the last few days before the September 30 judgement reminded the older generation of those heydays of the movement when the whole country was brought to a standstill. Parents, especially Muslims, were not sending their sons and daughters to schools and colleges, people would avoid journey and remain confined to home after sunset in many parts of the country.
Journey of terror: death and destruction following Advani's rath yatra in 1990. [The Hindu]
We are now in the position to look at the history from hindsight and can react more maturely. It is good that even the Sangh Parivar leaders, from the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat to Lal Krishna Advani and Narendra Modi, are trying to say that it is not the issue of defeat and victory. But the next generation has now become aware as to how these people celebrated on the streets of Ayodhya and many parts of the country the demolition of Babri Masjid. Media have now highlighted the photos which show Advani, Joshi, Uma Bharati and others hugging each other as the 464 years old structure was being brought down. The slogan Ek Dhako Aur Do (Give one more shove) to pull down the mosque is now known to the new generation.
Had the parties been more sensible and mature the solution could have been reached without shedding blood. The whole movement certainly polarized the country no end and gave birth to hotheads among the Muslims too. More than the verdict, the unwinding of the whole chain of events––obviously the by-product of the judgement––may go a long way to change the thinking of both the communities.
Unlike till early 1990s the passion has subsided and people have become more rational. Time has proved a great healer. Even the Sangh Parivar knows that they cannot whip up the same fervour and sentiment on the same issue once again in less than two decades. This is a lesson for the future generation.
FREE REPRINTS
Unless otherwise noted, you can republish our articles for free. You just have to credit TwoCircles.net and link it back to us, and you can’t edit our material or sell it separately. (We're licensed under Creative Commons, which provides the legal details.). For publishing TwoCircles.net photos please contact info@twocircles.net.
The Impact of Rationality of the Sikh Vichar Manch
The Impact of Rationality of the Sikh Vichar Manch
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
Ayodhya Verdict: A lesson for the coming generation
http://twocircles.net/2010oct01/ayodhya_verdict_lesson_coming_generation...
Reaction To Congress Welcomes Efforts for Amicable Settlement
Are Muslims Not Co-Sharers In Their Native Land, India?
What Can Be the Remedy to Do Justice?
And Much More……..
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
Muslim bodies urged to join Babri legal fight
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article840092.ece
Points at Glance:
1. “All prominent Muslim organisations, religious denominations, religious seminaries and the Babri Masjid Movement” to intervene in the appeal to be filed on behalf of Muslims in the Supreme Court against the Ayodhya title suits judgment.
2. The “lawyers, historians, and archaeologists besides civil society and other progressive and secular groups” also invited to join in the effort to challenge the judgment in the interest of upholding constitutional and judicial principles.
3. The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (JUH) said nobody had the authority to gift away a mosque that been built according to the principles of sharia. “No forceful or coercive occupation can change the status of a mosque. Therefore Muslims can never give up their claim to any part of the mosque which has been used as a mosque uninterruptedly for the last 400.
4. Now, question arises whether the Supreme of India in face of the negative attitude of RSS-BJP and the Congress towards Muslims and the minorities in general, for the political reasons, will uphold the constitutional and judicial principles?
5. Will the Supreme of India answer to the question in appeals to be filed?
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
Submitted by Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana (not verified) on 21 October 2010 - 10:33pm.
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
Who is who? Who can make out the difference between the communal forces and non-communal forces in India?
The Sikh Vichar Manch requests to find out the difference between RSS and Congress?
OR
To find out find out the difference between Mohan Bhagwat and Sonia Gandhi in the context?
Mohan Bhagwat criticises those who have questioned Ayodhya verdict
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
NEW DELHI: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has criticised those who have questioned the Allahabad high court judgement in the Ayodhya title suit, saying he found it strange that his organisation was being pilloried for welcoming the verdict.
VERSUS
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
In almost in the same language, Congress president Sonia Gandhi criticizes those who are distorting Ayodhya verdict
“Congress president Sonia Gandhi also emphasised that any distortion of the verdict by communal forces was detrimental to the larger national interest and would cause harm to the nation's mood and desire for peace and harmony.”
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
By
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
The Impact of Rationality of the Sikh Vichar Manch
The Impact of Rationality of the Sikh Vichar Manch
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
Ayodhya Verdict: A lesson for the coming generation
http://twocircles.net/2010oct01/ayodhya_verdict_lesson_coming_generation...
Reaction To Congress Welcomes Efforts for Amicable Settlement
Are Muslims Not Co-Sharers In Their Native Land, India?
What Can Be the Remedy to Do Justice?
And Much More……..
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
Muslim bodies urged to join Babri legal fight
http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/article840092.ece
Points at Glance:
1. “All prominent Muslim organisations, religious denominations, religious seminaries and the Babri Masjid Movement” to intervene in the appeal to be filed on behalf of Muslims in the Supreme Court against the Ayodhya title suits judgment.
2. The “lawyers, historians, and archaeologists besides civil society and other progressive and secular groups” also invited to join in the effort to challenge the judgment in the interest of upholding constitutional and judicial principles.
3. The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (JUH) said nobody had the authority to gift away a mosque that been built according to the principles of sharia. “No forceful or coercive occupation can change the status of a mosque. Therefore Muslims can never give up their claim to any part of the mosque which has been used as a mosque uninterruptedly for the last 400.
4. Now, question arises whether the Supreme of India in face of the negative attitude of RSS-BJP and the Congress towards Muslims and the minorities in general, for the political reasons, will uphold the constitutional and judicial principles?
5. Will the Supreme of India answer to the question in appeals to be filed?
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
Submitted by Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana (not verified) on 21 October 2010 - 10:33pm.
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
Who is who? Who can make out the difference between the communal forces and non-communal forces in India?
The Sikh Vichar Manch requests to find out the difference between RSS and Congress?
OR
To find out find out the difference between Mohan Bhagwat and Sonia Gandhi in the context?
Mohan Bhagwat criticises those who have questioned Ayodhya verdict
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
NEW DELHI: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has criticised those who have questioned the Allahabad high court judgement in the Ayodhya title suit, saying he found it strange that his organisation was being pilloried for welcoming the verdict.
VERSUS
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
In almost in the same language, Congress president Sonia Gandhi criticizes those who are distorting Ayodhya verdict
“Congress president Sonia Gandhi also emphasised that any distortion of the verdict by communal forces was detrimental to the larger national interest and would cause harm to the nation's mood and desire for peace and harmony.”
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
By
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
What Is Difference Between RSS and Congress?
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
Who is who? Who can make out the difference between the communal forces and non-communal forces in India?
The Sikh Vichar Manch requests to find out the difference between RSS and Congress?
OR
To find out find out the difference between Mohan Bhagwat and Sonia Gandhi in the context?
Mohan Bhagwat criticises those who have questioned Ayodhya verdict
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/Mohan-Bhagwat-c...
NEW DELHI: RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has criticised those who have questioned the Allahabad high court judgement in the Ayodhya title suit, saying he found it strange that his organisation was being pilloried for welcoming the verdict.
VERSUS
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
In almost in the same language, Congress president Sonia Gandhi criticizes those who are distorting Ayodhya verdict
“Congress president Sonia Gandhi also emphasised that any distortion of the verdict by communal forces was detrimental to the larger national interest and would cause harm to the nation's mood and desire for peace and harmony.”
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
By
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
Reaction To Congress Welcomes Efforts for Amicable Settlement
Ayodhya verdict: Congress welcomes efforts for amicable settlement, says Sonia
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ayodhya-verdict-Congress-welcom...
REACTION BY
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
The Sikh Vichar Manch exceptionally pay regards to Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her children, Rahul and Priyanka for their liberal attitude, farsightedness and for the choice of Dr. Manmohan Singh as the Prime Minister of India.
Click to read observation about them
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/Personalities-Congratulation%20to%20the%2...
The party chief said that the verdict in no way condones the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992 which was a "shameful and criminal act for which the perpetrators must be brought to justice".
The operative part of Congress president Sonia Gandhi first comment on Ayodhya title suit verdict as reported is as under:
"However, we must now await the final decision of the Supreme Court as and when the appeal is filed," Congress president Sonia Gandhi said, echoing the views of the Congress Working Committee which had met earlier this month.
At the same time, Sonia Gandhi also emphasised that any distortion of the verdict by communal forces was detrimental to the larger national interest and would cause harm to the nation's mood and desire for peace and harmony.
In Congress president Sonia Gandhi 'letter to Congresspersons', she said the Congress welcomes efforts by the parties concerned to find an amicable and peaceful settlement.
Sonia Gandhi’s aforesaid, the first comment on Ayodhya title suit verdict, not appeals to mind legally being self contradictory. As she says about Ayodhya title suit verdict that "However, we must now await the final decision of the Supreme Court as and when the appeal is filed," and also emphasised that any distortion of the verdict to be taken as an act of communal forces detrimental to the larger national interest and would cause harm to the nation's mood and also welcomes efforts by the parties concerned to find an amicable and peaceful settlement. For the innocence shown about the verdict by the people, the Congress chief said that it goes to the credit of the people of the country.
As to how there can be the final decision of the Supreme Court and or an amicable and peaceful settlement by the parties concerned without distortion of the verdict and in the absence of the open deliberations, to have views and comments by way interpreting the Judgment legally?
It has to be seen, whether the Judgment is based on law and fact or purely it is based on faith and deserves to be out rightly rejected not to be distorted only being totally illegal, passed in violation of the rule of law establishing wrong precedent suggesting to ignore the Constitution of India?
The rest part of the comment is true and correct though politically motivated as usually the political parties do in this country.
The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’ is neither a Judgment nor a compromise, but it is a suggestive compromise formula, and the Judges were not honest and sincere enough to mention it so in their respective conclusions as reports suggest and published so far. That’s all parties concerned have decided to go in appeal before the Supreme Court of India.
The related views already sent as under:
‘The Ayodhya Title Suits’
What Can Be the Remedy to Do Justice?
The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’ is neither a Judgment nor a compromise, but it is a suggestive compromise formula, and the Judges were not honest and sincere enough to mention it so in their respective conclusions as reports suggest and published so far.
First: All parties should file an appeal collectively or separately with their proposed compromise, keeping in mind and on the basis of the suggestive compromise formula enshrined in ‘The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’. Or by rejecting the same, the appeal(s) be filed before the Supreme Court of India only for the legal solution of the disputed land.
Second: All parties to the suit including the ‘Receiver’ central government of India ultimately, the central government of India has to remain custodian and must be declared so of the entire disputed land by the Supreme Court of India, should settle the way complete land or in parts to be used by the parties collectively or separately or by the public in general and the same settlement be given a shape of final compromise with the free consent of the parties to the suits, without any ambiguity so that no future controversy be raised about any other similar or such building and or religious place, duly accepted as correct and signed by the parties, before the Supreme Court of India in the appeal(s) filed against ‘The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’, otherwise, the decision shall never be acceptable especially by the Hindu leaders as a just verdict under the Constitution of India.
Third: The out come of the Supreme Court of India’s legal Judgment without the compromise, legally pronounced, and the legal implications of the Judgment, as it is very likely to go against the majoritism under the Constitution of India, that may not be acceptable to the majoritism without controlling the religious heads within and outside India.
In nutshell, the government of India has to play the major role to decide the dispute amicably without any ambiguity so that no future controversy is caused or raised about any other similar or such building and or religious place(s) also.
The State Must Change Sincerely Its Attitude Religiously
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/Religiou%20Politics-The%20State%20Must%20...
In absence of the above, it was rightly concluded in the article, ‘Justice in Ayodhya’ The Allahabad judgment disempowers India's largest religious minority. This will cause strife and discontent rooted in rightful anger at its illegality and irrationality. India can afford neither communal biases in the judiciary and terrible abuse of law nor large-scale popular disaffection if it is to survive as a democracy.
Justice in Ayodhya
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=158825
Submission by
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
Ayodhya Verdict: A lesson for the coming generation
http://twocircles.net/2010oct01/ayodhya_verdict_lesson_coming_generation...
INTRODUCTION
Click to read-Thanks
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/022004/Book/pg10.htm
SikhSpectrum.com Quarterly.
As I religiously browsed through Sardar Balbir Singh Sooch's remarkable thesis “Why India is devoid of Rule of Law?” I could not help reacting in the ...
www.sikhspectrum.com/022004/Book/pg10.htm -
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/022004/Book/pg10.htm
Are Muslims Not Co-Sharers In Their Native Land, India?
Are Muslims Not Co-Sharers In Their Native Land, India?
Let the Supreme Court also decide whether Muslims are Co-sharers or are Muslims second class citizens in their Native Land, India in appeals against the ‘The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’ in view of the following note?
Sikhs Can’t Be Anti-India or None Else Also
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/022004/Book/pg10.htm
As Sikhs have to take and demand their share as their ‘Sikh Rights’ finally out of India only.
When, the Sikh Vichar Manch says, “Hindu hatred against the Sikh and Muslim minorities is the root cause for the constant genocide. A Sikh Sovereign State is the only answer for the calamity fallen upon the Sikhs. We, again thank him (then Mr. Bill Clinton the President of USA Washington) for the interest taken in Sikh Rights” only conveys Sikhs pending desires and aspirations.
But, when the same slogan or demand, ‘A Sikh Sovereign State or the demand of Sikh Rights’ was and is being raised at the instance of the Indian government agencies, it has altogether a different meaning and the slogan or demand of ‘A Sikh Sovereign State’ being used like a double edged weapon to eliminate and defame Sikhs, leveling them as the separatists and anti-India. Sikhs are one of the co-sharers in India and thus can not be anti-India.
As to how Sikhs can be anti to their native land i.e. India as one of the co-sharers in India?
Whenever, the so-called nationalists in power or without power in India level any co-sharer in India as an enemy or anti-India, let it be Sikhs or Muslims or someone else as a class, may be minority or majority community, then, such leveled co-sharer for his own maximum benefits in India has legal right to get his share partitioned out of the jointly held land i.e. India.
It is the legal spirit, position and theme within the rule of law under the Constitution of India as far as, I understand law of the land and the Sikh Vichar Manch always advancing Sikhs claim of ‘Sikhs Rights’ legally only.
Hence, Sikhs can’t be anti-India, because they (Sikhs) have to take and demand their share as their ‘Sikh Rights’ finally out of India.
By
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/022004/Book/pg10.htm
What Can Be the Remedy to Do Justice?
‘The Ayodhya Title Suits’
What Can Be the Remedy to Do Justice?
The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’ is neither a Judgment nor a compromise, but it is a suggestive compromise formula, and the Judges were not honest and sincere enough to mention it so in their respective conclusions as reports suggest and published so far.
First: All parties should file an appeal collectively or separately with their proposed compromise, keeping in mind and on the basis of the suggestive compromise formula enshrined in ‘The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’. Or by rejecting the same, the appeal(s) be filed before the Supreme Court of India only for the legal solution of the disputed land.
Second: All parties to the suit including the ‘Receiver’ central government of India ultimately, the central government of India has to remain custodian and must be declared so of the entire disputed land by the Supreme Court of India, should settle the way complete land or in parts to be used by the parties collectively or separately or by the public in general and the same settlement be given a shape of final compromise with the free consent of the parties to the suits, without any ambiguity so that no future controversy be raised about any other similar or such building and or religious place, duly accepted as correct and signed by the parties, before the Supreme Court of India in the appeal(s) filed against ‘The Verdict On the Ayodhya Title Suits’, otherwise, the decision shall never be acceptable especially by the Hindu leaders as a just verdict under the Constitution of India.
Third: The out come of the Supreme Court of India’s legal Judgment without the compromise, legally pronounced, and the legal implications of the Judgment, as it is very likely to go against the majoritism under the Constitution of India, that may not be acceptable to the majoritism without controlling the religious heads within and outside India.
In nutshell, the government of India has to play the major role to decide the dispute amicably without any ambiguity so that no future controversy is caused or raised about any other similar or such building and or religious place(s) also.
The State Must Change Sincerely Its Attitude Religiously
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/Religiou%20Politics-The%20State%20Must%20...
In absence of the above, it was rightly concluded in the article, ‘Justice in Ayodhya’ The Allahabad judgment disempowers India's largest religious minority. This will cause strife and discontent rooted in rightful anger at its illegality and irrationality. India can afford neither communal biases in the judiciary and terrible abuse of law nor large-scale popular disaffection if it is to survive as a democracy.
Justice in Ayodhya
http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/news-details.php?nid=158825
Submission by
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
JUSTICE DIED IN ALLAHABAD, LONG LIVE JUSTICE!
ONCE A CASE CAME UP BEFORE PROPHET DAWOOD (puh) WHO WAS ALSO THE SUPREME JUDGE OF HIS KINGDOM. THE CASE WAS ABOUT TWO WOMEN EACH CLAIMING THAT THE BABY IS HER CHILD. BEING A WISE JUDGE, HE COOLY DECLARED THAT HE WANTED TO RENDER JUSTICE TO BOTH THE PARTIES AND SO LET THE CHILD BE CUT INTO TWO PIECES AND LET EACH WOMAN TAKE HALF THE CHILD. THE FALSE CLAIMANT READILT GAVE HER CONSENT BUT THE REAL MOTHER DESIRED THAT THE CHILD SHOULD LIVE AND SO PLEADED THAT THE CHILD MAY BE GIVEN TO THE OTHER CLAIMANT.PROPHET DAWOOD IMMEDIATE RECOGNIZED WHO THE TRUE CLAIMANT AMONG THE TWO WAS AND HANDED OVER THE CHILD TO ITS TRUE MOTHER.
IN THE RECENT AYODHYA CASE, THE HIGH COURT JUDGES WERE NOT DAWOODS
S.M.PASHA
When Akshardham temple was
When Akshardham temple was attacked by Muslims, there was no riot anywhere in India. Does this not show the peace-loving nature of Hindus? Christians and Hindus of Goa can live together. However Hindus in Kashmir are driven out. Show me on Muslim majoriy country where non-Muslim can have any rights.
Akshardham temple was attacked by...
Robert Fernandes !
Akshardham Temple was attacked by "rented" goondas of Naari Hatyakaari Baabu. That's the PRIME REASON there were NO RIOTS. If investigated properly, it would have EXPOSED Naari Hatyakaari Baabu / Hindutva involvement, and would have NEGATIVELY AFFECTED Hindutva in Gujarat.
Not-even in one RIOT / Terrorist ATTACK case has there been a FAIR INVESTIGATION - as real architects, funders, helpers of terrorists i.e. HINDUTVA would be exposed.
Be awake with your "eyes and ears" open, and RECALL premature Bomb-blasts of 2009 Deepavali in Margao, Goa - there have been NO ARRESTS nor PUNISHMENT to-date.
Please try to use your God-gifted WISDOM - instead to WRONGLY trying to tow-Hindutva-lies of HATRED, DIVERSION, and OBFUSCATION. Thank you.
An Indian
Do not spread unfounded stories
Reply to Robert,Who attacked Akshardham temple? Muslims? Who told you so? Ask Nari Hatyakari Modi about who attacked temple and who killed Hemant Karkare.Why could not the police catch terrorists alive even that was possible? Muslims had never driven out Kashmir Pandits but Army did so as required by Brahmanical Terror Outfit(RSS) to create trouble in Kashmir.The number of Muslims killed by Army is ten times more than the number of Pandits gone out. Please do not spread baseless stories.
I just realized this is not
I just realized this is not an article for rational thinking , all the publications is heavily biased
Well then since my views will not be documented or acknowledged , history if Islamic invaders to India prove this .
The remember when in a land and you do not like it then you can leave . All Muslims who are not happy living in India , please leave and go. Pakistan was made 60 years ago, why did you stay? As you are brothers and sisters and you follow a common mythology then they should welcome you with open arms
And if you are upset about people claiming land fro before , then accept what Muslim invaders did to gain the land in the first place and see if you agree
To the moderator I do not believe you will have a basis to have a healthy discussion until Muslims know how they actually came to follow their religion , what sacrifices their ancestors did or more relevantly did not
The Ayodhya verdict will set a precedent a very important one . I for one am glad finally the local indigenous population are standing up for their history their culture and are speaking up. Its strange Muslim invaders never cared about their artefacts , shrines , monuments , their lives , Wives , daughters etc . I think everywhere there is a Hindu temple demolished or made to be nullified by the Muslim rule should revert back
Is it not said , if we believe your religious text that you can not build and destroy…actually is a matter of interpretation and as I have mentioned this is not a fair platform from what I have read so far so whats the point
What Sharma tried to project For the New Generation?
RELATED:
http://www.deccanherald.com/content/101496/justice-sharma-wrote-verdict-...
Justice Sharma wrote verdict even in illness
What Sharma tried to project him down with high fever yet he continued writing the Ayodhya judgment?
Decide after reading the comments on the web
TO SEE:
Posted Comments For and Against Ayodhya Verdict
http://twocircles.net/?q=2010sep30/babri_verdict_aimplb_member_asked_lea...
Before Babri verdict, an AIMPLB member asked to leave Bhopal for 6 months
Two out of three judges have
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on 2 October 2010 - 1:20am.
Two out of three judges have Bachelor Degree in Science not Politics .
They have given verdict based on logic not faith .It was proved beyond doubt that there was a Hindu Religious structure present below the mosque .
Reply
The Option between the ‘Generalists’ or the ‘Scientists’
On the question of option between the ‘Generalists’ or the ‘Scientists’ (Specialists), who are to be considered better as Judges, Administrators, Rulers, the answer has to be the ‘Generalists’ only?
However, the Judges having such a long experience, the arguments against them shall not be justified on this issue.
Whatever, they did, intentionally and deliberately’ and the reasons are best known to them.
The case was to be decided by the legal experts not by the scientists as being appreciated here.
Moreover, science students being considered specialized only in a particular field are rarely preferred for law.
To avoid their entry in law, the three years course now being replaced slowly with five years course after 10+2 class pass students in India.
In five years course in law, during the first two year, only art subjects and in remaining three years, law subjects are taught to the students. However, after such a long experience of the Judges, the arguments for and against the Judges do not matter in this case.
The Sikh Vichar Manch does reiterate its comments sent to the web so far.
http://twocircles.net/?q=2010sep30/babri_verdict_aimplb_member_asked_lea...
Before Babri verdict, an AIMPLB member asked to leave Bhopal for 6 months
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/sunday-toi/special-report/Ayodhy...
Ayodhya verdict
http://twocircles.net/?q=2010oct01/ayodhya_verdict_lesson_coming_generat...
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/devils-advocate-arun-jaitley-on-the-ayodhya-v...
By
Balbir Singh Sooch, Advocate, Ludhiana
Chief and Spokesperson, Sikh Vichar Manch
http://www.sikhvicharmanch.com/
http://www.facebook.com/#!/profile.php?id=100000753376567
Verdict or Fun?
The verdict given by the court on Babri Masjid cannot be justified. and it cannot be accepted in any case. There was a Masjid, the whole world saw. There was a Babar & Mir Baki, the whole world knows. If someone doubts, can read the history. Babar is a history, Ram is a mythological figure , which never exists in real life. I don't understand why people still thinks that there was a birth place of him. My urge to people is come out of their dreams and live in real life.
Those who claim about existence of Ram and Ram's birth place have nothing to do with Ram or Ram Mandir, What they need is VOTES to remain in power for those glorious five years which gets them ample wealth during their remain in power, whether its India National Congress or BJP.
As for mythology and reality
As for mythology and reality than all religious texts are mythology , so by the very same token Mohamed is a mythological figure and if in todays world of Intelligence and rational thinking if one was to see visions of supreme beings and hearing voices in our dreams aka Mohamed , the Muslim Prophet" , then my well read modern intelligent friend he would be locked up , imprisoned , and treated for paranoid schizophrenia. And as for religious texts the world knows that inital writings of the Qu'ran started 100-150 years after the death of Mohammed. So there is already a bias, and as fpr parchment and paper to record history was only made possible with the paper mill in Baghdahd well after Mohammed
So I would not go down this route and talk about facts and visual evidence
The whole world knows Babar was ruthless tyrant as was Aurungzeb, Shah Jahan , nearly all Muslim invaders to India were a cruel , murdering unfair unjust rulers ; from discriminatin taxes , conversion by the sword and that too is documented eg Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh and so on . They did not even leave their own family murdering brothers and their ow Fathers and children for power .The world can see Muslim buildings built on Mandirs eg Kashi and Benares . If you want proof there is more than enough
The world can see how and why Islam spread in India. So open your eyes , read and acknowledge your history , how why and what you are . Then talk
babari
the issue of babari judgment from high court,
three persons are divided the muslims heart,unfortunatly no any cristian judge there, otherwise he also...............
let us wach what is doing everybody, let us close our mouth,let us close our eyes,.......until finish everything.
Wonderful PRECEDENT - if left unchallenged
Strictly "following" OR "referring" to Allahabad High Court Verdict, young generation AND future generations can ILLEGALLY occupy anyone's HOME, evict LEGAL OWNERS, claim that their great great great grandfathers were born at that place ((without proof)), and CLAIM that the property belongs to them / or the property should be given to them.
When the matter goes to court, the concerned courts CANNOT DENY claimant's claim - with Allahabad High Court Verdict as PRECEDENT.
A wonderful "precedent" indeed, which if left unchallenged, "may" open PANDORA BOX of "claims" / "disputes, in future.
An Indian
Indian is talking about kashmiri pandit property
Hi,
I think u got confused on the topic. We are not talking about the hindu pandit property in kashmir and we are talking about ayodya and the legal verdict. Once it has gone to the court it goes by evidences and facts not excuses.
Pandit Nehru SOLD "Kashmir" to India
"satwa gunam" @ 2 October 2010 - 11:30 pm. under title: Indian is talking about.....
Satwa Mahashay - Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru, an original Kashmiri Pandit and FIRST UNOPPOSED Prime Minister of Independent India SOLD "Kashmir" to India. A forged signature of Maharaja of Kashmir is present with U.N.
I am referring to Allahabad High Court Verdict. Holi is long over and was in April. We are in October ! Are you still UNDER INFLUENCE of BHANG ? Oh, WERE the LAWYERS who gave the Verdict also under INFLUENCE of BHANG ??? I now understand, why the BIAS and COMPLETE OVERLOOKING of LEGALITY, and tilt towards RELIGIOUS "bias" !!!
Do you know a MINOR / INSANE / INTOXICATED person's WITNESS, AGREEMENT, and DECISION are UNACCEPTABLE to LAW ? Wake up !
An Indian
That's WHAT Hindutva / Sangh Parivaar have been
You are again WRONG "satwa gunam", and always get confused by MIXING UP ISSUES. Here is an authentic link about DUBIOUS DESIGNS / ILLEGAL OCCUPATION by Hindus of Muslim Properties. This report is just the TIP of AN ICEBERG:
http://www.twocircles.net/2010aug06/pm_intervenes_properties_restored_ra...
I wonder WHETHER you know WHAT'S the MEANING of the saying: "TIP OF AN ICEBERG".
Well, I doubt even your MATHEMATICS, you don't know DIFFERENCE between Parsi and Muslim religion. If in doubt, most Gujarati Maiman have same SIR-NAMES as Hindus. When a Muslim questions them, they say: WE ARE MUSLIMS. And when a Hindu questions them, they say: WE ARE HINDUS, our names are LIKE MUSLIM. So you need to figure out WHERE they STAND.
Anyhow coming back to Babri Masjid Title Dispute VERDICT. There is NO DOUBT our Honourable PRESIDING JUDGES "completely" overlooked LEGAL ASPECT, who built, no. of years the property was constructed, on whose land it was built, etc. etc. etc. The HONOURABLE JUDGES "cowed" to PRESSURE TACTICS, just considered the ILLEGAL DEMOLISHER'S and OCCUPIER'S "wants and wishes".
The above web-linked article about Raja of Mahmoodabad's property ILLEGAL OCCUPATION and GIVING BACK to Legal Owner is NO DIFFERENT. I know thousands and thousands of such properties, which have been OCCUPIED and now these PROPERTIES are VALUED "crores and crores" of Rupees - which they JUST OCCUPIED "illegally".
PROPERTIES in India are OWNED by ILLEGAL OCCUPIERS - and this is an UNDENIABLE FACT. The law is: JISKII LAATHI USKII BHAINS. All in all: Jungle Raaj in Kalyug Samaaj.
An Indian
P.S.:
-----
I wrote earlier DIFFERENT YUGS - as per Hindu Scripts. Going by scripts and Hindu Calender, Raam may have been born about 432,000 years before. Date / Place: UNKNOWN. The WORLD has HISTORY dating BACK to a MAXIMUM of 4,000 to 5,000 years. And you are going back 430,000 years. Now you say: WHO IS RUNNING IN REVERSE GEAR?
Budhist should get their destroyed religious place back
There are many temples built after destroying budhist religious place and killing them. Now budhist should now claim those religious place based on faith and astha.
Buddhists claim
If Buddhists have the desire or the need to claim, They would.They do not need your appeal.
Thanks
satya
Yes buddhist can start from afghanistan
Hi,
Buddhist can start the latest one which happened in afghanistan and then they can come to india if they are successfull and survive it the well cultured islamic talibans there.
Budhism history wil expose Hinduism voilent past
Since India claim to birth place (and death place)of Budhism, we should start from here.
Satwa, i think u have forgetten counting, 2 comes before 10 not otherway round. Lets correct the ancient history first b4 correcting mordern history.
It will expose Hinduism and its brutal and violent past.
figment of historian
Hindu destructing buddhist is the figment of the western historians. It is like wmd of iraq. Buddhism is part of hinduism where it wanted to move away from ritualism to extreme spiritualism.
satwa, u r not the first one to tell these stories
The Hindu historians do not care about the historical sequence of incidents. They are careless in producing date-wise chronological order of historical evidences. Whenever they are forced to produce evidences they become confused and do not know what to say. Then they start telling the stories (MBD History BA-II, KU,p. 39.)
http://superhindus.wordpress.com/how-brahmins-killed-buddhism-in-india/iT
Buddhism was replaced by triumphant Brahminism, the eclipse of Buddhism in India was obviously primarily a result of the Brahminical revival. The Buddha was a true revolutionary—and his crusade against Brahminical supremacy won him his most ardent followers from among the oppressed castes. The Buddha challenged the divinity of the Vedas, the bedrock of Brahminism. He held that all men are equal and that the caste system or varnashramadharma, to which the Vedas and Other Brah'minical' books had given religious sanction, was completely false.
To lend legitimacy to their campaign against Buddhism, Brahminical texts included fierce strictures against Buddhists. Manu, in his Manusmriti, laid down that, "If a person touches a Buddhist […] he shall purify himself by having a bath."
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/022008/buddhism.htm
Babar was mythology and Ram is history
There is no evidence that there was a temple underneath the Babari masjid. The Archaeological Survey of India did an excavation and found nothing. The claim of a Hindu temple at the site is a Hindutva fabrication, which feeds imaginary Hindu grievances. As for Rama, Ambedkar writes he is the worst character in Hindu mythology. He refers to Rama slaying Sambuga the sudra for doing tapas.
What has the court to decide ? How can Rama be born inside the Babari masjid ? He is a mythological figure ! This stir was created by mischievous Hindu communalists, whose only aim was power, even if it meant national disintegration.
Lesson of history
If new generation should know the history, why not start from the destruction of the temple by Babur in 1528? How is it possible that Babri structure do not look like other Masjids, its because its built from the part of broken Hindu temple.
Post new comment