Ayodhya Ram Mandir: India PM Modi inaugurates Hindu temple on razed Babri mosque site [Update in post#488]

[cricketjoshila]

Muslim groups oppose prayer ban in open space in Indian state

Muslims have been offering prayers on government-owned land at 37 locations designated by local administration - Anadolu Ajansı

www.aa.com.tr

Do read up the thread on this on PP.

But in short, these were public government owned lands which Muslims had started using as places to offer namaz.

That's against law. Government land isn't for religious purpose unless permission for the same is taken. This isn't an Islamic country.

The excuse of the Muslim side was that there weren't enough mosques near by.

There were confrontations with people of other communities who protested against public open spaces being taken up for religious purpose.

Is the government responsible for providing namaz places in a secular republic? NO.

 

[cricketjoshila]

What’s funny is the people who actually ruined the region are sitting pretty in the west and selling arms to both sides and making profit from this turmoil. I think a prosperous India is good for Pakistan and vice versa. The Indians here complain about the division of the country, well they want to get over it and not further those divisions. Penalizing their own Muslim countrymen for what happened centuries ago or the partition won’t do them any good.

Basically Hindus should keep compromising. Ain't happening.

 

[CricketCartoons]

One thing, my pure hatred is only, and only for those Islamic invaders. I don't have a bloody thing against Indian Muslims. If there exists any descendants of those invaders in my country, I don't have a thing against them either. Their ancestors did wrong, they can't be held responsible for that.

What annoys me is when some people in my country try to glorify those invaders, and try to justify their actions of the past.

I was also like that, but a major section of the indian muslims have let me down. Their insensitivity to my religion. And I am not even a practicing hindu. Due to this I have started monthly donations to hindu causes. While I still give business to muslims but even that might change.

If there was a disputed site which was considered the birthplace of a very important muslim figure (like among the top 10) and it hindus had a temple built by a medieval hindu king, I would gladly give up the claim in favour of muslims. But the muslim mind things differently: what once became ours is forever ours. So I guess hindus also have to be like that. You cannot play a game with different rules for each side.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You can also be grateful for the ability to visit your holy places in Pakistan on pilgrimage. We won’t do an operation blue star on you poor Sikhs.

I think a hindu temple might be more appropriate, not sure how many there are in Pakistan.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Muslims cannot pray in the open? Care to elaborate?

Decolonizing doesn't have a time limit.

Spanish were under muslim rule for 500 years till they overthrew them and decolonized.

Greeks were under Ottomans for 400 years before they got freedom and then decolonized.

We are just beginning.

What you call decolonised was actually forced conversion or penalty of death.

 

[uppercut]

I was also like that, but a major section of the indian muslims have let me down. Their insensitivity to my religion. And I am not even a practicing hindu. Due to this I have started monthly donations to hindu causes. While I still give business to muslims but even that might change.

If there was a disputed site which was considered the birthplace of a very important muslim figure (like among the top 10) and it hindus had a temple built by a medieval hindu king, I would gladly give up the claim in favour of muslims. But the muslim mind things differently: what once became ours is forever ours. So I guess hindus also have to be like that. You cannot play a game with different rules for each side.

Exactly this!!. BTW the insensitivity does not just come from village stupids. It is across the board. I personally know very well educated NRI Muslim's who have the exact same opinion and mindset that you see on this forum. They just do not care Hindu sensitivities . Its like their brain is permanently brainwashed into thinking that the entire world is wrong and they are right. And this isn't anecdotal experiences of some. You get timely reminders through high profile atrocities reported in media from time to time. Everything from genocide to riots to issuing fatwas to love jihad to openly celebrating when Pakistan win a cricket match against India ( Thank god that these have become rare events! ) and anything inbetween.​

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Exactly this!!. BTW the insensitivity does not just come from village idiots. It is across the board. I personally know very well educated NRI Muslim's who have the exact same opinion and mindset that you see on this forum. They just do not care Hindu sensitivities . Its like their brain is permanently brainwashed into thinking that the entire world is wrong and they are right. And this isn't anecdotal experiences of some. You get timely reminders through high profile atrocities reported in media from time to time. Everything from genocide to riots to issuing fatwas to love jihad to openly celebrating when Pakistan win a cricket match against India ( Thank god that these have become rare events! ) and anything inbetween.​

High profile atrocities like the ethnic cleansing in Myanamar perhap? Or the Gujarat riots in 2002?

 

[uppercut]

High profile atrocities like the ethnic cleansing in Myanamar perhap? Or the Gujarat riots in 2002?

Tell me what was the root cause in both those events according to you.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Exactly this!!. BTW the insensitivity does not just come from village idiots. It is across the board. I personally know very well educated NRI Muslim's who have the exact same opinion and mindset that you see on this forum. They just do not care Hindu sensitivities . Its like their brain is permanently brainwashed into thinking that the entire world is wrong and they are right. And this isn't anecdotal experiences of some. You get timely reminders through high profile atrocities reported in media from time to time. Everything from genocide to riots to issuing fatwas to love jihad to openly celebrating when Pakistan win a cricket match against India ( Thank god that these have become rare events! ) and anything inbetween.​

It doesn't mean they are at fault. Every community has a world view and ideology and it is theirs. Hindus should learn from muslims instead of wondering why no one is understanding their causes. And I say this for myself too. Hindus are easily won over by a bowl of sewaiyan or plate of biryani and don't have clarity of their civilization, its past and its goal. While muslims are always aware of their past and their goals.

 

[CricketCartoons]

High profile atrocities like the ethnic cleansing in Myanamar perhap? Or the Gujarat riots in 2002?

If people from a minority religion can burn a train full of majority religion, it means they are so much empowered and not oppressed. Although this is not the kind of empowerment anyone wants, but one must never ignore crimes by minority on majority. eg, if you try to find data on crimes by hindus on muslims in pakistan, it will very very difficult to find. True picture is found by not hiding any data, but seeking full data: majority on minority crimes and minority on majority crimes.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Again hindus must learn from muslims. (many) Hindus try to be balanced, while (many) muslims are clear when to speak out and when to stay silent. Which data to highlight and which data to gaslight.

 

[uppercut]

If people from a minority religion can burn a train full of majority religion, it means they are so much empowered and not oppressed. Although this is not the kind of empowerment anyone wants, but one must never ignore crimes by minority on majority. eg, if you try to find data on crimes by hindus on muslims in pakistan, it will very very difficult to find. True picture is found by not hiding any data, but seeking full data: majority on minority crimes and minority on majority crimes.

You dont realize this .... in their minds these are not crimes but a righteous step towards the greater good. Exact same thought process that venerates vast number of invaders who committed even more horrific atrocities.

Atleast thats the only logical conclusion that one can draw when I see people quoting the Gujarat riots but never ever list the original atrocity that lead to the sad events in its aftermath.

 

[CricketCartoons]

You dont realize this .... in their minds these are not crimes but a righteous step towards the greater good. Exact same thought process that venerates vast number of invaders who committed even more horrific atrocities.

Atleast thats the only logical conclusion that one can draw when I see people quoting the Gujarat riots but never ever list the original atrocity that lead to the sad events in its aftermath.

It is only hindus who think communal is a bad word. Communal means for the community. Muslims always stand for their community, whether in good or bad. Hindus feel guilty if someone calls them communal.

 

[Stewie]

One thing, my pure hatred is only, and only for those Islamic invaders. I don't have a bloody thing against Indian Muslims. If there exists any descendants of those invaders in my country, I don't have a thing against them either. Their ancestors did wrong, they can't be held responsible for that.

What annoys me is when some people in my country try to glorify those invaders, and try to justify their actions of the past.

Thats just normal behavior. Human beings do not and should not hold on to centuries old grudges.
There is a lot going on to keep one occupied in today's world, than look around and fume over what other person is thinking or believing. Usually these methods are used to only ignite divisions for the purpose of taking control and power.

Apart from you most other Indians seem to have this affliction. They even seem to believe that Hindus always compromise. This is the same chooran white nationalists in the US sell whites. Tell them they are being replaced and wiped out. Hindus in India and Whites in the US are still a vast majority and based on what has been happening over the last 10 or so years, it does not seem to me either of them are being forced to make any sort of compromise.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Thats just normal behavior. Human beings do not and should not hold on to centuries old grudges.
There is a lot going on to keep one occupied in today's world, than look around and fume over what other person is thinking or believing. Usually these methods are used to only ignite divisions for the purpose of taking control and power.

Apart from you most other Indians seem to have this affliction. They even seem to believe that Hindus always compromise. This is the same chooran white nationalists in the US sell whites. Tell them they are being replaced and wiped out. Hindus in India and Whites in the US are still a vast majority and based on what has been happening over the last 10 or so years, it does not seem to me either of them are being forced to make any sort of compromise.

Drawing equivalence between white nationalists and indian hindus. Between colonialists and the colonized. Between the owners vs the invaded. Between slave owners and slaves. Between imperialists and victims of genocide.

This is how hindus should be gaslit.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You dont realize this .... in their minds these are not crimes but a righteous step towards the greater good. Exact same thought process that venerates vast number of invaders who committed even more horrific atrocities.

Atleast thats the only logical conclusion that one can draw when I see people quoting the Gujarat riots but never ever list the original atrocity that lead to the sad events in its aftermath.

Burning a train full of innocent people would never be seen as a righteous step.

 

[Hitman]

Thats just normal behavior. Human beings do not and should not hold on to centuries old grudges.

Tere's one grudge I hold, and will do so all my life. In fact I believe every Indian should never forget it, nor their upcoming generations. And it doesn't involve those Islamic invaders.

It's the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.

 

[cricketjoshila]

You dont realize this .... in their minds these are not crimes but a righteous step towards the greater good. Exact same thought process that venerates vast number of invaders who committed even more horrific atrocities.

Atleast thats the only logical conclusion that one can draw when I see people quoting the Gujarat riots but never ever list the original atrocity that lead to the sad events in its aftermath.

See how the narrative is always about post godhra riots, not a word on Godhra train burning.

Narrative is Babri structure demolished, not that babri structure was built on a Hindu temple by destroying it.

If one was truly worried about human rights, they will talk about both sides. Not one side.

But recently this strategy isn't working because The leftists are losing influence fast.

 

[Stewie]

Tere's one grudge I hold, and will do so all my life. In fact I believe every Indian should never forget it, nor their upcoming generations. And it doesn't involve those Islamic invaders.

It's the Jallianwala Bagh massacre.

To be very frank, we should not forget any of the atrocities, whether its the so-called Musims invaders from the west, the colonizers, the right wing Hindu zealots, the muslim baby massacring sikhs, the islamic radical terrorists, left wing zealots, whatever. Forgetting such stuff means you are opening yourselves up for something like this happening again. Which is why I keep saying dont forget it, but dont turn it into a grudge because doing so will result in something similar happening again. This time it will be you perpetrating the injustice.

There have been some very interesting skirmishes/conflicts in history. We had the English/French wars. We had the independence war of US vs the Britain. We have had various other European conflicts, the first World War and the second World War, etc. Let me point out to you the difference in how they have moved on from those conflicts versus how we are handling ours. They have economic and international cooperation and union in terms of international affairs and trades. We, on the other hand, tend to go in the exact opposite direction. Who benefits from our ongoing conflicts?

The asian subcontinent is massive in terms of population and a strong block here makes for bad news for them which is why they are happy stoking and flaring up any conflicts in the region. Sooner we learn from this the better.

Once again, I would not want you to forget any of it. I, as well, hope our future generations do not forget all the sacrifices and massacres we had to endure at the hands of Indians during the partition. But a grudge, it should not be.

 

[Stewie]

See how the narrative is always about post godhra riots, not a word on Godhra train burning.

Narrative is Babri structure demolished, not that babri structure was built on a Hindu temple by destroying it.

If one was truly worried about human rights, they will talk about both sides. Not one side.

But recently this strategy isn't working because The leftists are losing influence fast.

Let us not conflate various issues in the guise of the "Muslim problem' just like the Nazis labelled the "Jewish Question"

This is highly ignorant and has zero basis in facts and ground realities. While we (Pakisanis) might support HAMAS or Kashmiri Freedom Fighters, there are a lot of Muslims in India who do not support the Kashmiri freedom fighters in India. Once again you are painting them with a wide brush. The Kashmiri struggle is a whole different animal, its a disputed region and a conflict between two nations. This thread is not about it. It is about how India has dealt with the Muslim minority in their own country, in areas which are not "disputed" regions.

By the way since you mentioned it, let me remind you India has also been involved in using violence in their support of Balochi rebels in Pakistan but of course you will conveniently not mention it.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

To be very frank, we should not forget any of the atrocities, whether its the so-called Musims invaders from the west, the colonizers, the right wing Hindu zealots, the muslim baby massacring sikhs, the islamic radical terrorists, left wing zealots, whatever. Forgetting such stuff means you are opening yourselves up for something like this happening again. Which is why I keep saying dont forget it, but dont turn it into a grudge because doing so will result in something similar happening again. This time it will be you perpetrating the injustice.

There have been some very interesting skirmishes/conflicts in history. We had the English/French wars. We had the independence war of US vs the Britain. We have had various other European conflicts, the first World War and the second World War, etc. Let me point out to you the difference in how they have moved on from those conflicts versus how we are handling ours. They have economic and international cooperation and union in terms of international affairs and trades. We, on the other hand, tend to go in the exact opposite direction. Who benefits from our ongoing conflicts?

The asian subcontinent is massive in terms of population and a strong block here makes for bad news for them which is why they are happy stoking and flaring up any conflicts in the region. Sooner we learn from this the better.

Once again, I would not want you to forget any of it. I, as well, hope our future generations do not forget all the sacrifices and massacres we had to endure at the hands of Indians during the partition. But a grudge, it should not be.

I have mentioned this before as well. One of the reasons (among others) I still consider India a third world country. The civilised nations of Europe have left their squabbling behind, the subcontinent is still living in the previous century. In some cases 6 centuries previous.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

One thing, my pure hatred is only, and only for those Islamic invaders. I don't have a bloody thing against Indian Muslims. If there exists any descendants of those invaders in my country, I don't have a thing against them either. Their ancestors did wrong, they can't be held responsible for that.

What annoys me is when some people in my country try to glorify those invaders, and try to justify their actions of the past.

The past cannot be embellished or rewritten by right wing hindus to spare your little feelings.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

By the way every action has a reaction. Resulting in an endless cycle. I understand how Hindus and Sikhs feel violated by Muslims. Now they want to do the same to Muslims in the name of decolonization.

Hope you guys bear in mind while using examples of Muslims in Spain, about what sort of repercussions they had to face due to such extreme measures. In this day and age, those measures will be even more extreme thanks to the geopolitical feedback.

I know it’s a dream of sanghis in Bharat but this will only result in a prolonged alienation and turmoil. It’s always better to reconcile and make the best of it with your fellow countrymen. Pakistan made a similar mistake and it didn’t end well for us.

Go and buy a Muslim a cup of chai and be nice to him. Hate doesn’t solve anything.

Spain is no example lol.

Muslims have 2 states in Hindustan and number 200 million in the state thats remaining.

These guys ranting now, got a state by promising secularism, out numbering the minority religion and then putting votes in for a right wing party.

How is it a reconqunista?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Spain is no example lol.

Muslims have 2 states in Hindustan and number 200 million in the state thats remaining.

These guys ranting now, got a state by promising secularism, out numbering the minority religion and then putting votes in for a right wing party.

How is it a reconqunista?

Pakistan was formed by a right wing party. Right wing is the right wing.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Spain is no example lol.

Muslims have 2 states in Hindustan and number 200 million in the state thats remaining.

These guys ranting now, got a state by promising secularism, out numbering the minority religion and then putting votes in for a right wing party.

How is it a reconqunista?

No one promised anything. And no one got anything. British created two dominions out of British India. Both were free to decide their future.

Stop telling lies.

Whether India would be secular was decided by the constitution assembly.

The two Muslim majority states are free to do whatever they want. Nobody whined when they declared themselves Islamic nation and made non muslims second class citizens.

So if the non muslim majority state has other communities exercising their rights stop crying.

Decolonizing is just beginning.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The past cannot be embellished or rewritten by right wing hindus to spare your little feelings.

But tyrants and invaders can be shown their place in history. Signs of oppression can be removed.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Let us not conflate various issues in the guise of the "Muslim problem' just like the Nazis labelled the "Jewish Question"

This is highly ignorant and has zero basis in facts and ground realities. While we (Pakisanis) might support HAMAS or Kashmiri Freedom Fighters, there are a lot of Muslims in India who do not support the Kashmiri freedom fighters in India. Once again you are painting them with a wide brush. The Kashmiri struggle is a whole different animal, its a disputed region and a conflict between two nations. This thread is not about it. It is about how India has dealt with the Muslim minority in their own country, in areas which are not "disputed" regions.

By the way since you mentioned it, let me remind you India has also been involved in using violence in their support of Balochi rebels in Pakistan but of course you will conveniently not mention it.

I am telling you about how the narrative is set. Its always playing the victim card when the original issue was started by Muslims during Gujarat.

The disputed structure at Ayodhya was built by destroying a Hindu temple. A fact proven by archaeological evidence. Yet when Hindus rebuilt a temple at one of their holiest places, its Hindus who are wrong.

 

[Stewie]

I am telling you about how the narrative is set. Its always playing the victim card when the original issue was started by Muslims during Gujarat.

The disputed structure at Ayodhya was built by destroying a Hindu temple. A fact proven by archaeological evidence. Yet when Hindus rebuilt a temple at one of their holiest places, its Hindus who are wrong.

We are going around in circles. I feel you are not willing to really "listen". You keep regurgitating the same points.

I will reiterate:

1. Nobody is denying Bbari Masjid was built on the ruins of a Hindu temple.
2. Whether that temple was and is actually proven to be the birthplace of Ram is highly questionable.
3. If a Masjid stands on the ruins of a temple from hundreds of years ago, is it ok to demolish the masjid? There will be tens of hundreds of such masjids in India. Where will you draw the line? Is this not antagonizing or mistreatment of the modern day Indian Muslims most of which express patriotism for India, as they should. Is this not violating their civil rights? If these masjids fall under some bigger Muslim religious or administrative body in terms of ownership rights, is that not violating their consitutional right?


I have noticed when we try to delineate #1 and #2 we dont get a straight answer and we are told to go read the judgment. I am sorry if I say I have zero confidence in the judgment and whatever proof provided by the Indian authorities and courts. And if you want to have a legitimate, calm and mature discussion, I will give you my reasons for that belief.
We are also told that its ok to generalize all Indian Muslims affected by such policy are actually radicals who support the Muslim conquerors of centuries ago who came and demolished hindu temples. It sounds to me like you just want a justification for your draconian measures and painting every Muslim as a zealot somehow makes you feel justified in supporting an unjust view in this regard.

 

[uppercut]

We are going around in circles. I feel you are not willing to really "listen". You keep regurgitating the same points.

I will reiterate:

1. Nobody is denying Bbari Masjid was built on the ruins of a Hindu temple.
2. Whether that temple was and is actually proven to be the birthplace of Ram is highly questionable.
3. If a Masjid stands on the ruins of a temple from hundreds of years ago, is it ok to demolish the masjid? There will be tens of hundreds of such masjids in India. Where will you draw the line? Is this not antagonizing or mistreatment of the modern day Indian Muslims most of which express patriotism for India, as they should. Is this not violating their civil rights? If these masjids fall under some bigger Muslim religious or administrative body in terms of ownership rights, is that not violating their consitutional right?


I have noticed when we try to delineate #1 and #2 we dont get a straight answer and we are told to go read the judgment. I am sorry if I say I have zero confidence in the judgment and whatever proof provided by the Indian authorities and courts. And if you want to have a legitimate, calm and mature discussion, I will give you my reasons for that belief.
We are also told that its ok to generalize all Indian Muslims affected by such policy are actually radicals who support the Muslim conquerors of centuries ago who came and demolished hindu temples. It sounds to me like you just want a justification for your draconian measures and painting every Muslim as a zealot somehow makes you feel justified in supporting an unjust view in this regard.

In one of the previous posts I copy/pasted the summary from the judgement which addressed point#2 .... in any case it is common knowledge that the mosque while it was around had no less than 12 load bearing pillars in plain eyesight that even a layman could tell are of Hindu origin. It is also common knowledge that invaders routinely did such things.

There is further circumstantial evidence that I posted in a different post/thread where later Moghul records and earlier Sikh records corroborate that this was the Ram Janmasthan. I will try to find that post later today.

Perhaps the most clinching evidence is that the mosque was also commonly known as the masjid-i-Janmasthan in Muslim records and British records and even the British rulers have documented that there is no doubt that the site was Janmasthan, there was also a Inscription from well before Babars time that was found soon after the mosque was demolished which says that it is the Ram temple.

 

[cricketjoshila]

We are going around in circles. I feel you are not willing to really "listen". You keep regurgitating the same points.

I will reiterate:

1. Nobody is denying Bbari Masjid was built on the ruins of a Hindu temple.
2. Whether that temple was and is actually proven to be the birthplace of Ram is highly questionable.
3. If a Masjid stands on the ruins of a temple from hundreds of years ago, is it ok to demolish the masjid? There will be tens of hundreds of such masjids in India. Where will you draw the line? Is this not antagonizing or mistreatment of the modern day Indian Muslims most of which express patriotism for India, as they should. Is this not violating their civil rights? If these masjids fall under some bigger Muslim religious or administrative body in terms of ownership rights, is that not violating their consitutional right?


I have noticed when we try to delineate #1 and #2 we dont get a straight answer and we are told to go read the judgment. I am sorry if I say I have zero confidence in the judgment and whatever proof provided by the Indian authorities and courts. And if you want to have a legitimate, calm and mature discussion, I will give you my reasons for that belief.
We are also told that its ok to generalize all Indian Muslims affected by such policy are actually radicals who support the Muslim conquerors of centuries ago who came and demolished hindu temples. It sounds to me like you just want a justification for your draconian measures and painting every Muslim as a zealot somehow makes you feel justified in supporting an unjust view in this regard.

1.Okay

2. Plethora of proof was provided to the courts regarding why that particular place is constantly as birth place of Lord Ram.

3. So Hindus should give up their rights because it will antagonize Muslims? Why don't Muslims give up the disputed mosque and not antagonize Hindus? What about the rights of the Hindus? India isn't an Islamic country where rights of Muslims take precedence.

If you take something forcefully like Muslim invaders did, it doesn't become your property. Hindus kept fighting for the place. British records says Hindus kept worshipping and didn't let go off the area. There were frequent confrontations.

If you have zero confidence in the judgement of Indian courts or Archaeological evidence of ASI well we have zero reasons to discuss anything.

Ayodhya or Kashi or Mathura are in India and therefore Indian courts and Archaeological Survey of India have jurisdiction here.
So unless you have an open mind and is ready to accept scientific evidence and legal reasons, for a judgement no matter where it comes from, discussion is useless.

Muslim invaders comes. Destroys a very important temple in a holy play. Then erects a mosque to remind the Hindus of their oppression and how their religion was trampled underfoot.

Later when Hindus try to take back the place. Muslims refuse to give it back.

What is the reason, unless its in support of the oppressive regime that built that building and unless they carry the same belief that other communities are below Muslims and be treated with contempt.

 

[Romali_rotti]

I am sorry if I say I have zero confidence in the judgment and whatever proof provided by the Indian authorities and courts.

The above I can agree with, only way confidence can be restored is if Pakistan Supreme court in Islamabad hears the Ayodhya case and provides a verdict.

 

[CricketCartoons]

We are going around in circles. I feel you are not willing to really "listen". You keep regurgitating the same points.

I will reiterate:

1. Nobody is denying Bbari Masjid was built on the ruins of a Hindu temple.
2. Whether that temple was and is actually proven to be the birthplace of Ram is highly questionable.
3. If a Masjid stands on the ruins of a temple from hundreds of years ago, is it ok to demolish the masjid? There will be tens of hundreds of such masjids in India. Where will you draw the line? Is this not antagonizing or mistreatment of the modern day Indian Muslims most of which express patriotism for India, as they should. Is this not violating their civil rights? If these masjids fall under some bigger Muslim religious or administrative body in terms of ownership rights, is that not violating their consitutional right?


I have noticed when we try to delineate #1 and #2 we dont get a straight answer and we are told to go read the judgment. I am sorry if I say I have zero confidence in the judgment and whatever proof provided by the Indian authorities and courts. And if you want to have a legitimate, calm and mature discussion, I will give you my reasons for that belief.
We are also told that its ok to generalize all Indian Muslims affected by such policy are actually radicals who support the Muslim conquerors of centuries ago who came and demolished hindu temples. It sounds to me like you just want a justification for your draconian measures and painting every Muslim as a zealot somehow makes you feel justified in supporting an unjust view in this regard.

This trick is old. Keep calling the majority bigots racists and fascists so that they keep making concessions for you. No one is falling for this anymore.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This trick is old. Keep calling the majority bigots racists and fascists so that they keep making concessions for you. No one is falling for this anymore.

Correct.

Muslims in majority can declare themselves Islamic country make other communities second class citizens.

But non Muslim majority nations must be secular, make concessions to muslims, not antagonize them. If asked to follow laws its extremism and bigotry.

No one in India is falling for this anymore. Don't know about the West.

 

[uppercut]

The above I can agree with, only way confidence can be restored is if Pakistan Supreme court in Islamabad hears the Ayodhya case and provides a verdict.

There is another option .... the righteous taliban supreme court ( whatever its called)

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Correct.

Muslims in majority can declare themselves Islamic country make other communities second class citizens.

But non Muslim majority nations must be secular, make concessions to muslims, not antagonize them. If asked to follow laws its extremism and bigotry.

No one in India is falling for this anymore. Don't know about the West.

Muslims in majority may or not declare themselves Islamic country, but where do you get this idea that they insist non-Muslim countries must be secular? If a country declares it has a secular constitution, they don't ask for Muslim permission, that is their own constitution. Unless you think India's constitution was written for them by Muslim overlords.

 

[Stewie]

1.Okay

2. Plethora of proof was provided to the courts regarding why that particular place is constantly as birth place of Lord Ram.

3. So Hindus should give up their rights because it will antagonize Muslims? Why don't Muslims give up the disputed mosque and not antagonize Hindus? What about the rights of the Hindus? India isn't an Islamic country where rights of Muslims take precedence.

If you take something forcefully like Muslim invaders did, it doesn't become your property. Hindus kept fighting for the place. British records says Hindus kept worshipping and didn't let go off the area. There were frequent confrontations.

If you have zero confidence in the judgement of Indian courts or Archaeological evidence of ASI well we have zero reasons to discuss anything.

Ayodhya or Kashi or Mathura are in India and therefore Indian courts and Archaeological Survey of India have jurisdiction here.
So unless you have an open mind and is ready to accept scientific evidence and legal reasons, for a judgement no matter where it comes from, discussion is useless.

Muslim invaders comes. Destroys a very important temple in a holy play. Then erects a mosque to remind the Hindus of their oppression and how their religion was trampled underfoot.

Later when Hindus try to take back the place. Muslims refuse to give it back.

What is the reason, unless its in support of the oppressive regime that built that building and unless they carry the same belief that other communities are below Muslims and be treated with contempt.

A hindu prejudiced court cannot be expected to be any better to Muslims than the army controlled one in Pakistan making so called judgments on democratic issues.

Well can you really blame us for believing that this was a kangaroo court? It is very very clear, even a blind man can see the prejudice and hate filled opinions here. You have gone from being a so-called secular state to a completely Hindu state hell bent on religious cleansing. There is evidence of that laying all around these discussion boards.

#3 is the biggest one. Are you telling me that all these masjids that have been built over the last 500 years, have never officially had their property owners decided? They remained disputed even during the time of the British colonial era? Do Hindus not have places of worship at all? HAVE MUSLIMS TAKEN OVER ALL THE MANDIRS which is prompting you to question "So Hindus should give up their rights..." That phrase is absolute. Signifies "ALL RIGHTS" there is absolutely no condition there, no middle ground. Can it be right? Of course not.

The hindus have just come up with this excuse to start razing masjids and the logic is "This is Hindu right". This goes against any human rights standard you can check. Pakistan has been guilty of maintaining poor standards when it comes to minority rights. India is quickly catch up.

 

[CricketCartoons]

A hindu prejudiced court cannot be expected to be any better to Muslims than the army controlled one in Pakistan making so called judgments on democratic issues.

Have you even read the judgement (freely available).

 

[CricketCartoons]

All judgements should be in muslims favour, otherwise the judgement is obviously bigoted. Another one from the playbook.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

All judgements should be in muslims favour, otherwise the judgement is obviously bigoted. Another one from the playbook.

The playbook of a Muslim is the Quran. From the Islamic point of view it is not in just the Muslim's favour to invite the non-Muslim to their religion, it is also in the non-Muslims favour as it will save them from damnation in the afterlife, and ease them from hatred to others in this one.

 

[CricketCartoons]

The playbook of a Muslim is the Quran. From the Islamic point of view it is not in just the Muslim's favour to invite the non-Muslim to their religion, it is also in the non-Muslims favour as it will save them from damnation in the afterlife, and ease them from hatred to others in this one.

This is the victim playbook I am talking about, please don't bring Quran into it.

The said poster is trying to play smart by appearing to be neutral but is actually providing cover fire by bringing in false equivalences and side stepping questions when challenged.

 

[cricketjoshila]

A hindu prejudiced court cannot be expected to be any better to Muslims than the army controlled one in Pakistan making so called judgments on democratic issues.

Well can you really blame us for believing that this was a kangaroo court? It is very very clear, even a blind man can see the prejudice and hate filled opinions here. You have gone from being a so-called secular state to a completely Hindu state hell bent on religious cleansing. There is evidence of that laying all around these discussion boards.

#3 is the biggest one. Are you telling me that all these masjids that have been built over the last 500 years, have never officially had their property owners decided? They remained disputed even during the time of the British colonial era? Do Hindus not have places of worship at all? HAVE MUSLIMS TAKEN OVER ALL THE MANDIRS which is prompting you to question "So Hindus should give up their rights..." That phrase is absolute. Signifies "ALL RIGHTS" there is absolutely no condition there, no middle ground. Can it be right? Of course not.

The hindus have just come up with this excuse to start razing masjids and the logic is "This is Hindu right". This goes against any human rights standard you can check. Pakistan has been guilty of maintaining poor standards when it comes to minority rights. India is quickly catch up.

1. Prove your allegations. The judgement is freely available. Read it and point out where is the bias.

2. So basically opinion of non muslims is biased. Court in a non muslim country is a kangaroo courts. If concessions are not made to Muslims its not secularism.

Finally the cat is out of the bag. Its about Muslim supremacy. Well this isn't a islamic country and other communities are not interested in making concessions. Neither is anyone afraid of antagonizing muslims.

3. Hindus were fighting court battles to get possession of land to rebuilt their temples during British period as well.

In a muslim rule what is the value of ownership of a non muslim? Those who broke temples will give ownership to Hindus?

AFAIK the demand has always been for 4 major temples that were razed and mosques built over them be returned to Hindus. I am not talking about fringe demands or some personal lawsuit.

They are:

Somnath: Mosque dismantled and moved to another site and Mandir built. Sanction came from Gandhiji himself. Sardar Patel did the Bhoomi poojan and Rajendra Prasad did consecration.

Ayodhya: Mandir built. 5 acres given for new Masjid.

Kashi: Case ongoing in courts. Till 1993 Hindus were allowed to worship in the cellar and basement. Political leadership stopped it in 1993. Hindus moved court and ASI Survey showed mosque was built on a temple. The western wall is still a temple wall re used as a mosque wall. Court recently allowed Hindus to restart worship in the cellar and basement.

Mathura: Two judgements of Allahabad high court by British judges in 1930s gave the land to Hindus. In 1967 the government via legislation took over the temple trust and gave the land in lease in perpetuity to Muslims. Case ongoing in courts.

As per you, Muslims cannot give 4 temples to Hindus. It will antagonize them and hurt their rights.

But Hindus are not antagonized by seeing these structures built on temples at their holiest cities.

Hindus have no right to few acres of land while Muslims have 2 nations in the subcontinent.

Think again

 

[cricketjoshila]

The playbook of a Muslim is the Quran. From the Islamic point of view it is not in just the Muslim's favour to invite the non-Muslim to their religion, it is also in the non-Muslims favour as it will save them from damnation in the afterlife, and ease them from hatred to others in this one.

Don't bring the holy Quran here.

Nowhere does it say that if people are unwilling to convert, destroy their temples and build mosques over them.

 

[hoshiarpurexpress]

Well same goes for Hindus, actually goes way way before even that. You guys are tearing down mosques on the basis of what happened 5,000 years ago … allegedly.

Let that sink in for second!

Hindus must reclaim what is rightfully theres and was stolen by Mughal terrorists

 

[Stewie]

Hindus must reclaim what is rightfully theres and was stolen by Mughal terrorists

Well whats next? The whole country is "rightfully" theirs then. Why even call yourselves secular? If we want to go by the zeitgeist and ownership details of the land from 500 years ago, or the time before the Mughal "terrorists" as you seem to imply, then by the same logic one can say there were no Muslims in the land at the time, which means NONE of the masjids are rightfully theirs.
Thats what you are saying. All that land and its ownership resides with the Hindus. and by further admission, and implication, even the Sikhs need to forego their rights and let hindus take their places of worship.

I hope you see my point if you want to use this argument. Just because you are chummy with the hindus, let us not use such inflammatory rhetoric because it goes against the basic societal principles. In other words, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You want to call India, Bharat fine. You want to change the name of the cities .. FINE. But the issue arises when it starts infringing on your citizens and their rights. As I said, its hard to reconcile property ownership matters in such cases where you have to retrace the steps over centuries, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

But by all that is evidenced here from the sentiment of the hindu posters, you see the majority view. They want India to be Bharat, the HINDU Land where Muslims exist but the preferrential treatment must be meted out to the majority and they should abide by the Hindu norms, adhere to their sentivity and relinquish their property or rights to Hindus because IT IS THERE LAND.

That is the gist of the matter. This can be further evidenced by what happened in Haryana last year where 200 muslim homes were razed by Hindus under the pretext of "insert your preferred Islamophobic trope here"

India authorities raze 200 Muslim homes following raging Hindu-Muslim rift

Indian

www.presstv.ir

 

[Romali_rotti]

A hindu prejudiced court cannot be expected to be any better to Muslims than the army controlled one in Pakistan making so called judgments on democratic issues.

Right. So the Muslims were compensated with a separate block of land per the court ruling.

What's happened here is the Rapist gets compensation for raping the victim.

If the same situation happened in Pakistan, with the Hindus now taking the role of the muslims in the Ayodhya situation, the hindus have been killed or forcefully converted, forget about getting any a separate allocation of land to build their mandir.

 

[CricketCartoons]

I hope you see my point if you want to use this argument. Just because you are chummy with the hindus, let us not use such inflammatory rhetoric because it goes against the basic societal principles. In other words, you cannot have your cake and eat it too. You want to call India, Bharat fine. You want to change the name of the cities .. FINE. But the issue arises when it starts infringing on your citizens and their rights. As I said, its hard to reconcile property ownership matters in such cases where you have to retrace the steps over centuries, but there has to be a line drawn somewhere.

He means issue arises when it starts infringing on the rights of muslims. And a line has to be drawn somewhere where it is convenient for muslims. All the mental gymnastics to support muslims. Really admirable quality. In his pretence to be neutral he is only espousing support for muslim and asking hindus to just let go.

Imagine someone telling Palestinians that they must let things go otherwise israelis will be antagonized. But they are brave and not afraid of sacrificing their rights. It is time hindus also learn that to get their rights they have to sacrifice their lives too. Let come whatever. We will get our rights. Even if we have to die for it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Right. So the Muslims were compensated with a separate block of land per the court ruling.

What's happened here is the Rapist gets compensation for raping the victim.

If the same situation happened in Pakistan, with the Hindus now taking the role of the muslims in the Ayodhya situation, the hindus have been killed or forcefully converted, forget about getting any a separate allocation of land to build their mandir.

Very slyly he was making equivalences between white nationalists and indian hindus. Drawing imaginary parallels between those who enslaved and ruled and invaded, with those who were enslaved, were ruled and were invaded. Any kind of mental gymnastics to gaslight hindus and further his own community's interest. While all pretending to be neutral.

 

[uppercut]

Burning a train full of innocent people would never be seen as a righteous step.

So the reason why EVERY single muslim poster never ever calls out that event is ..... ? You guys always start from the aftermath. Reasons are not hard to figure out. Especially when sooo many Indian posters have explained with proper facts what really happened across countless threads. And let me tell you this .... YOU almost always run away when you find yourselves in a corner. Only to surface on a different thread and start all over again as though nothing was said before.

​

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Don't bring the holy Quran here.

Nowhere does it say that if people are unwilling to convert, destroy their temples and build mosques over them.

But I never said anything about destroying temples

 

[Stewie]

But I never said anything about destroying temples

Like I said engaging Hindus is like going around in circles. It is hypocrisy of the highest order. They want India to turn into bharat a Hindu nation and yet want the recognition of a secular state where the rights of all citizens are equal. Biggest load of bull ever.

As it stands, Hindus get the preferential treatment. India or bharat or Hindustan…. Not a secular state.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

So the reason why EVERY single muslim poster never ever calls out that event is ..... ? You guys always start from the aftermath. Reasons are not hard to figure out. Especially when sooo many Indian posters have explained with proper facts what really happened across countless threads. And let me tell you this .... YOU almost always run away when you find yourselves in a corner. Only to surface on a different thread and start all over again as though nothing was said before.

​

No point in quoting me after your hideous comments which I was responding to have been removed.

 

[uppercut]

No point in quoting me after your hideous comments which I was responding to have been removed.

What was the gist of the deleted comment? Regardless .... I stand by every post I make here and I most certainly will give you a very logical explanation backed by facts to everything I have said in the past.... and I do not run !!!

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

British imperalists are seen as villains in India and are not venerated.

Raj means Rule in various Indian languages. British Raj means British rule.

Statues of British imperalists and places regularly replaced and renamed.

Crying victim won't help. Decolonizing of all invaders will be done.

Was there a similar term applied for the Mughal Empire in Bharat? Mughal Raj sounds really odd, can't think I have ever heard it before.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Was there a similar term applied for the Mughal Empire in Bharat? Mughal Raj sounds really odd, can't think I have ever heard it before.

Mughal Empire that's called Mughal Samrajya. Thats Mughal Empire literally.

Raj means rule. That's it. So British Raj is British Rule litterally.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Mughal Empire that's called Mughal Samrajya. Thats Mughal Empire literally.

Raj means rule. That's it. So British Raj is British Rule litterally.

So how do we classify the Rajput caste? I always assumed this meant offspring of Kings, hence their high status, does it in fact mean offspring of rulers?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

NGL the mosque that they are building as a replacement to Babri masjid looks good.

It's time for the Indian Muslims to remember the words of Bulle Shah and move on.

I think what would be a nice gesture if formally admittance of the demolition and desecration by Hindus of the mosque as being wrong and Muslims to also admit that if the mosque was indeed a temple then its construction was wrong in the first place.

Doubt it will happen though.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So how do we classify the Rajput caste? I always assumed this meant offspring of Kings, hence their high status, does it in fact mean offspring of rulers?

Yes. Rajput means offspring of ruler.

Raja means the one who rules or ruler.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Yes. Rajput means offspring of ruler.

Raja means the one who rules or ruler.

So does that mean Mughal ruler offspring should be referred to as Rajputs?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

^^

Bumped in case @cricketjoshila missed it.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So does that mean Mughal ruler offspring should be referred to as Rajputs?

Rajput is a Hindu caste. Used by a section of Kshatriya who wanted to separate themselves from other Kshatriyas by defining their royal descent.

All Rajputs are born Kshatriyas and have a very ancient lineage.

Mughals are neither Kshatriyas nor do they have such descent from any of the ancient or divine Kshatriya clans.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Rajput is a Hindu caste. Used by a section of Kshatriya who wanted to separate themselves from other Kshatriyas by defining their royal descent.

All Rajputs are born Kshatriyas and have a very ancient lineage.

Mughals are neither Kshatriyas nor do they have such descent from any of the ancient or divine Kshatriya clans.

So when we talk about the British Raj, they are referred to in similar veneration due to their high status of leadership during Empire, only difference being the Indians saluted them as a European equivalent of the Rajputs.

 

[cricketjoshila]

So when we talk about the British Raj, they are referred to in similar veneration due to their high status of leadership during Empire, only difference being the Indians saluted them as a European equivalent of the Rajputs.

No they are not. They are referred to as cruel colonial rulers and looters.

There is no veneration.

 

[Hitman]

No they are not. They are referred to as cruel colonial rulers and looters.

There is no veneration.

Thieves is the appropriate word for them.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Thieves is the appropriate word for them.

Yes. Thieves.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Why refer to them as the British Raj in the first place then, given the connections the term Raj has with one of the highest Indian castes, Rajput? For example, have you ever heard of European empires in Islamic countries being referred to as British Khilafat or French Khilafat?

 

[DeadlyVenom]

I read some articles that the Ram temple closes for 1 hour a day as the deity is a child and gets tired out by worshippers. They give it one hour to rest and recover

The deity is also woken up at 4am to get ready for the arrivals of worshippers.

Can someone explain this to me? Is this the case for all hindu deity or just this temple in particular?

 

[FearlessRoar]

So desperate to win elections​

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

PM Modi offers prayers at Ayodhya Ram Temple, leads roadshow with Yogi Adiyanath​

Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered prayers at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, on Sunday. He also held a roadshow in the district after performing aarti at the grand Ram temple. This is PM Modi's first visit to Ayodhya after the Ram Lalla idol's consecration on January 22, 2024.

The Prime Minister offered prayers at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple amid tight security in Ayodhya on Sunday ahead of the third phase of the Lok Sabha Election 2024. He performed 'Dandavat Pranam' before Ram Lalla's idol.

According to reports, the entrance gates to the temple were decorated with flowers, with 'Om' formed with yellow petals. Replicas of a bow and an arrow made using flowers were also seen at various places. People from different walks of life lined the road as Modi's motorcade passed through.

Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra was quoted by ANI as saying that Ram Lalla seated in the temple wore a light pink attire on Sunday.

PM Modi arrived in Ayodhya for the first time after the 'Pran Pratishtha' ceremony at the Ram temple on January 22. The 'Pran Pratishtha' of Shri Ram Lalla at Ayodhya's historic temple was held on January 22, with PM Modi performing the Vedic rituals, led by a group of priests.

PM Modi embarked on the roadshow after offering prayers at the temple. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the BJP's Faizabad candidate Lallu Singh accompanied him.

On Sunday, PM Modi held his second roadshow in Ayodhya in the last five months. He had carried out a grand roadshow during the inauguration of Maharishi Valmiki International Airport on December 30, 2023.

Ayodhya will be voting in the fifth phase on May 20. Ayodhya (Faizabad) Lok Sabha constituency comprises five Vidhan Sabhas (legislative assemblies): Ayodhya, Bikapur, Milkipur, Rudauli and Dariyabad (Barabanki).

The BJP has again fielded sitting MP Lallu Singh from Ayodhya for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.

The polling in Uttar Pradesh, which sends 80 members to the Lok Sabha, is being held in all seven phases of the parliamentary elections. Voting in 16 seats was completed in the first two phases. Lok Sabha elections are being held in seven phases till June 1 and the counting of votes in all seats is scheduled for June 4.

PM Modi offers prayers at Ayodhya Ram Temple, leads roadshow: WATCH

Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarked on a roadshow after offering prayers at the Ayodhya Ram temple. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the BJP's Faizabad candidate Lallu Singh accompanied him.

www.livemint.com

 

[Bhaag Viru Bhaag]

^^^ This Modi guy is a Grade A actor.

 

[MP2011]

^^^ This Modi guy is a Grade A actor.

I think feku will be a big failure in movies too.

 

[Mockingbird]

I read some articles that the Ram temple closes for 1 hour a day as the deity is a child and gets tired out by worshippers. They give it one hour to rest and recover

The deity is also woken up at 4am to get ready for the arrivals of worshippers.

Can someone explain this to me? Is this the case for all hindu deity or just this temple in particular?

Very common. Most sanctum sanctorums open with the early morning puja to wake up the god & closes during certain time of the day (mainly to prep/decorate for the evening pujas). For eg, the Tirupati balaji temple opens at 3 am (amazing experience to see & hear the morning puja at 3 am) & closes for a few overs in the afternoon (weekdays only).

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Very common. Most sanctum sanctorums open with the early morning puja to wake up the god & closes during certain time of the day (mainly to prep/decorate for the evening pujas). For eg, the Tirupati balaji temple opens at 3 am (amazing experience to see & hear the morning puja at 3 am) & closes for a few overs in the afternoon (weekdays only).

That's very interesting thanks for the response

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

So desperate to win elections​

View attachment 143625

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------​

PM Modi offers prayers at Ayodhya Ram Temple, leads roadshow with Yogi Adiyanath​

Prime Minister Narendra Modi offered prayers at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, on Sunday. He also held a roadshow in the district after performing aarti at the grand Ram temple. This is PM Modi's first visit to Ayodhya after the Ram Lalla idol's consecration on January 22, 2024.

The Prime Minister offered prayers at the Ram Janmabhoomi Temple amid tight security in Ayodhya on Sunday ahead of the third phase of the Lok Sabha Election 2024. He performed 'Dandavat Pranam' before Ram Lalla's idol.

According to reports, the entrance gates to the temple were decorated with flowers, with 'Om' formed with yellow petals. Replicas of a bow and an arrow made using flowers were also seen at various places. People from different walks of life lined the road as Modi's motorcade passed through.

Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra was quoted by ANI as saying that Ram Lalla seated in the temple wore a light pink attire on Sunday.

PM Modi arrived in Ayodhya for the first time after the 'Pran Pratishtha' ceremony at the Ram temple on January 22. The 'Pran Pratishtha' of Shri Ram Lalla at Ayodhya's historic temple was held on January 22, with PM Modi performing the Vedic rituals, led by a group of priests.

PM Modi embarked on the roadshow after offering prayers at the temple. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the BJP's Faizabad candidate Lallu Singh accompanied him.

On Sunday, PM Modi held his second roadshow in Ayodhya in the last five months. He had carried out a grand roadshow during the inauguration of Maharishi Valmiki International Airport on December 30, 2023.

Ayodhya will be voting in the fifth phase on May 20. Ayodhya (Faizabad) Lok Sabha constituency comprises five Vidhan Sabhas (legislative assemblies): Ayodhya, Bikapur, Milkipur, Rudauli and Dariyabad (Barabanki).

The BJP has again fielded sitting MP Lallu Singh from Ayodhya for the 2024 Lok Sabha polls.

The polling in Uttar Pradesh, which sends 80 members to the Lok Sabha, is being held in all seven phases of the parliamentary elections. Voting in 16 seats was completed in the first two phases. Lok Sabha elections are being held in seven phases till June 1 and the counting of votes in all seats is scheduled for June 4.

PM Modi offers prayers at Ayodhya Ram Temple, leads roadshow: WATCH

Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarked on a roadshow after offering prayers at the Ayodhya Ram temple. Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and the BJP's Faizabad candidate Lallu Singh accompanied him.

www.livemint.com

I can't lie, I am constantly fascinated to see which way the new India is headed with the BJP in power. I think this picture tells a lot.