Babri Masjid - A lost opportunity for Indian Muslims?

[cricketjoshila]

It's disputed that there was a temple there, that would be why the Indian Muslims haven't agreed to it.

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

Not that it's our business to tell them what to think, it's Modi's and his Hindutva battalions who must take this responsibility.

Archaelogical Survey of India has done extensive excavations and has found remains of a temple beneath the masjid.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Archaelogical Survey of India has done extensive excavations and has found remains of a temple beneath the masjid.

The Archaelogical Survey of India is probably run predominantly by Hindus, all of whom are fine people I'm sure, but they won't necessarily be objective. Hence I would prefer to go with the independent survey:

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

 

[Tusker]

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

This would be the view of Hindu extremists and Islamaphobes , nothing more to it.

It's disputed that there was a temple there, that would be why the Indian Muslims haven't agreed to it.

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

Not that it's our business to tell them what to think, it's Modi's and his Hindutva battalions who must take this responsibility.

finally got that site to work on a different browser .... see below tidbits from your own source which clearly says right in the 1st para that it was done during 19th century when Modern Archeological techniques were unheard of and most importantly it was done at a time when the Mosque was still around (Meaning there was no way they could have found out what was underneath it which is what the ASI excavation did)


-------

“There are several very holy Brahmanical temples about Ajudhya, but they are all of modern date, and without any architectural pretensions whatever. But there can be no doubt that most of them occupy the sites of more ancient temples that were destroyed by the Muslims.” AND “Close by is the Lakshman Ghat, where his brother Lakshman bathed and about one-quarter of a mile distant, in the very heart of the city, stands the Janam Asthan, or “Birth-place temple” of Rama.”


"The bigot by whom the temples were destroyed is said to have erected mosques on the situations of the most remarkable temples; but the mosque at Ayodhya, which is by far the most entire, and which has every appearance of being the most modern, is ascertained by an inscription on its walls (of which a copy is given) to have been built by Babur, five generations before Aurungzeb... The only thing except these two figures and the bricks, that could with probability be traced to the ancient city, are some pillars in the mosque built by Babur. These are of black stone, and of an order which I have seen nowhere else, ... they have been taken from a Hindu building, is evident, from the traces of images being observable on some of their bases; although the images have been cut off to satisfy the conscience of the bigot."

"
The mosque is embellished with fourteen columns of only five or six feet in height, but of very elaborate and tasteful workmanship, said to have been taken from the ruins of the Hindoo fanes, "


“There are several very holy Brahmanical temples about Ajudhya, but they are all of modern date, and without any architectural pretensions whatever. But there can be no doubt that most of them occupy the sites of more ancient temples that were destroyed by the Muslims.” AND “Close by is the Lakshman Ghat, where his brother Lakshman bathed and about one-quarter of a mile distant, in the very heart of the city, stands the Janam Asthan, or “Birth-place temple” of Rama.”

"These were the “Janmasthan,” the Sargadwar mandir” also known as “Ram Darbar” and the “Tareta-ke-Thakur”. On the first of these the Emperor Babar built the mosque which still bears his name, A. D. 1528. On the second Aurangzeb did the same A. D. 1658-1707; and on the third that sovereign, or his predecessor, built a mosque, according to the well-known Mahomedan principle of enforcing their religion on all those whom they conquered. "

----------

 

[cricketjoshila]

The Archaelogical Survey of India is probably run predominantly by Hindus, all of whom are fine people I'm sure, but they won't necessarily be objective. Hence I would prefer to go with the independent survey:

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

How can excavations be done under the mosque when the mosque was standing? ASI did the excavations post demolition of the mosque there by revealing the structure. Not to mention the autheticity of a survey done in 2000s to one done in 19th century.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

How can excavations be done under the mosque when the mosque was standing? ASI did the excavations post demolition of the mosque there by revealing the structure. Not to mention the autheticity of a survey done in 2000s to one done in 19th century.

But the one done in the 19th century was by an independent party. That isn't to disparage any Indian survey, it just suits my personal requirements for impartiality better.

 

[cricketjoshila]

But the one done in the 19th century was by an independent party. That isn't to disparage any Indian survey, it just suits my personal requirements for impartiality better.

There was no excavation done in 19th century as the masjid was still standing. Excavation under the masjid was only done in 2000s.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

There was no excavation done in 19th century as the masjid was still standing. Excavation under the masjid was only done in 2000s.

I believe I made my position clear, that the date isn't important, neutrality of information is. Please refer to earlier replies if in doubt.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I believe I made my position clear, that the date isn't important, neutrality of information is. Please refer to earlier replies if in doubt.

But this information wasnt even there in 19th century. So the question of neutrality doesnt even arise.

 

[someone21]

Left historians prevented resolution of Babri Masjid dispute, says KK Mohammed, former ASI regional head

This is a Muslim and he clearly, mentions that not one, but 14 pillars were found. This case is not just about the mandir. It's also about the brainwashing, misleading led by leftists.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

But this information wasnt even there in 19th century. So the question of neutrality doesnt even arise.

I'm not talking about the information, I'm talking about the source of the information. One is neutral, the source you are pushing is from Indians and therefore probably Hindus. You understand this of course, but you don't want to acknowledge it.

 

[Tusker]

I'm not talking about the information, I'm talking about the source of the information. One is neutral, the source you are pushing is from Indians and therefore probably Hindus. You understand this of course, but you don't want to acknowledge it.

You might want to try reading your own source. See my response in post#163 above.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You might want to try reading your own source. See my response in post#163 above.

Your response just proves my point as you have left out the parts of the article which rubbish the Hindutva claims, and this is why it is better to trust impartial sources from even the 19th century than those with a vested interest.

 

[Tusker]

Your response just proves my point as you have left out the parts of the article which rubbish the Hindutva claims, and this is why it is better to trust impartial sources from even the 19th century than those with a vested interest.

Which part did i leave out?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Which part did i leave out?

It's a huge article, you yourself have described your version as 'tidbits'. I could glean the relevant parts but I don't really see the need to, the article itself is titled" Babri dispute: There was no trace of Ram temple, revealed British accounts"

I am not interested in cutting and pasting wars, I made my position clear on what I consider neutral sources of information. You want to refer to another source which fits more to your confirmation bias, feel free, that is your choice.

 

[KingKhanWC]

OHHHHh Right, Taliban is not muslim anymore ? .... This guy lol,

lol. I wrote they dont represent Muslims. It's like me saying look Hindu's throw dead bodies in rivers or use Cow dunk for shampoo. Of course this doesn't represent all Hindu's.

Btw there are hardly any Bhuddists in Afghanistan while India has the largest population of Muslims in any nation, Hindu's need to show them more respect.

 

[KingKhanWC]

Place of worship used by thousands of people? You really should refrain from commenting on topics you know nothing about.

Babri masjid wasn't in use for more than 40 years before the events of 1992.

It has been in the past and may have in the future if radical safron clothed extremists didn't climb on top of it.

 

[cricketjoshila]

I'm not talking about the information, I'm talking about the source of the information. One is neutral, the source you are pushing is from Indians and therefore probably Hindus. You understand this of course, but you don't want to acknowledge it.

The site of the structure is in India so ofcourse Indian agency will be doing the excavation.

If only hindu views mattered in India then there would be no need of a court case or a excavation.

The basic point is that new information in view of the latest excavation has shown that a temple existed on the site of the mosque.

 

[KingKhanWC]

that link wont open but here is the wiki page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babri_Masjid







LoL ... lets see ... what was the Kaaba used for before it fell into Muslim hands ? How did Farsi fire worshippers get driven out of their lands and end up in India ? How did the Pandit populaton in Kashmir become nearly 0% ? On and on and on and on .... I could literally keep going for pages listing one shocking attrocity after another from Day 1 to now.

And Taliban aren't Muslim ehh ? Does OBL count ?

Hindu's will claim there is , we know this alreadly. Authentic reports from history has suggested no temple, I will take this evidence . You can believe your Saffron friends.

The rest of your post has no releveance and I suggest try to read a little better.

 

[Tusker]

It's a huge article, you yourself have described your version as 'tidbits'. I could glean the relevant parts but I don't really see the need to, the article itself is titled" Babri dispute: There was no trace of Ram temple, revealed British accounts"

I am not interested in cutting and pasting wars, I made my position clear on what I consider neutral sources of information. You want to refer to another source which fits more to your confirmation bias, feel free, that is your choice.

Here is the entire article. pls tell us which parts other than the title endorse your side of the story.




------Article------

Home

«Back

Babri dispute: There was no trace of Ram temple, revealed British accounts

** Web Team | New Delhi | Last Updated at December 06 2017 10:52 IST


A shed with a makeshift temple inside and covered by tarpaulins stands on the disputed site in Ayodhya. Photo: Reuters


The Allahabad High Court, which delivered its verdict trifurcating the disputed site in Ayodhya, had relied extensively on the 19th-century accounts of British gazetteers. The primary aim of studying these accounts was to determine the existence of any Hindu place of worship or a city with any semblance to Ram, a god to many Hindus in India. Here is a look at some of the accounts of British officials recorded and dispatched at a time when modern-day archaeological techniques were unheard of.


Walter Hamilton’s account (1828):


“Pilgrims resort to this vicinity, where the remains of the ancient city of Oude, and capital of the great Rama, are still to be seen; but whatever may have been its former magnificence it now exhibits nothing but a shapeless mass of ruins. The modern town extends a considerable way along the banks of the Goggra, adjoining Fyzabad, and is tolerably well peopled; but inland it is a mass of rubbish and jungle, among which are the reputed site of temples dedicated to Rama, Seeta, his wife, Lakshman, his general, and Nanimaun (a large monkey), his prime minister. The religious mendicants who perform the pilgrimage to Oude are chiefly of the Ramata sect, who walked round the temples and idols, bathe in the holy pools, and perform the customary ceremonies.”

ALSO READ: Babri Masjid dispute timeline: From its roots to its bloody consequences



Dr Buchanen’s account after he surveyed eastern parts of the country, including Ayodhya, from 1807 to 1816 and sent his reports to England. Montgomery Martin published parts of the said reports in 1838 in a six-volume book titled History, Antiquities, Topography and Statistics of Eastern India:


“.... if these temples ever existed, not the smallest trace of them remains to enable us to judge of the period when they were built; and the destruction is very generally attributed by the Hindus to the furious zeal of Aurungzeb, to whom also is imputed the overthrow of the temples in Benares and Mathura. What may have been the case in the two latter, I shall not now take upon myself to say, but with respect to Ayodhya the tradition seems very ill founded. The bigot by whom the temples were destroyed is said to have erected mosques on the situations of the most remarkable temples; but the mosque at Ayodhya, which is by far the most entire, and which has every appearance of being the most modern, is ascertained by an inscription on its walls (of which a copy is given) to have been built by Babur, five generations before Aurungzeb... The only thing except these two figures and the bricks, that could with probability be traced to the ancient city, are some pillars in the mosque built by Babur. These are of black stone, and of an order which I have seen nowhere else, ... they have been taken from a Hindu building, is evident, from the traces of images being observable on some of their bases; although the images have been cut off to satisfy the conscience of the bigot.”

ALSO READ: Babri demolition: How India, Hindus and Muslims have changed in 25 years



Thornton's gazetteer 1854-58 reprinted in 1993 devotes a page to Avadh/Ayodhya. In the said gazetteer, heavy reliance is placed on Buchanan's report (who later on took the name of Hamilton).


“that the heaps of bricks, although much seems to have been carried away by the river, extend a great way; that is, more than a mile in length, and more than half a mile in width; and that, although vast quantities of materials have been removed to build the Mahomedan Ayodha or Fyzabad, yet the ruins in many parts retain a very considerable elevation; nor is there any reason to doubt that the structure to which they belonged has been very great, when we consider that it has been ruined for above 2,000 years. The ruins still bear the name of Ramgurh, or Fort of Rama; the most remarkable spot in which is that from which, according to the legend, Rama took his flight to heaven, carrying with him the people of his city; in consequence of which it remained desolate until repeopled by Vikramaditya, king of Oojein, half a century before the Christian era, and by him embellished with 360 temples. Not the smallest traces of these temples, however, now remain; and according to native tradition, they were demolished by Aurungebe, who built a mosque on part of the site. The falsehood of the tradition is, however, proved by an inscription on the wall of the mosque, attributing the work to the conqueror Baber, from whom Aurungzebe was fifth in descent. The mosque is embellished with fourteen columns of only five or six feet in height, but of very elaborate and tasteful workmanship, said to have been taken from the ruins of the Hindoo fanes, to which they had been given by the monkey-general Hanuman, who had brought them from Lanka or Ceylon. Altogether, however, the remains of antiquity in the vicinity of this renowned capital must give very low idea of the state of arts and civilisation of the Hindoos at a remote period. A quadrangular coffer of stone, whitewashed, five ells long, four broad, and protruding five or six inches above ground, is pointed out as the cradle in which Rama was born, as the seventh avatar of Vishnu; and is accordingly abundantly honoured by the pilgrimages and devotions of the Hindoos.”

ALSO READ: Babri demolition, 25 years on: BJP's transition from Ram to reform to Ram



Cunningham’s account inArchaeological report (1862-63):


“There are several very holy Brahmanical temples about Ajudhya, but they are all of modern date, and without any architectural pretensions whatever. But there can be no doubt that most of them occupy the sites of more ancient temples that were destroyed by the Muslims.” AND “Close by is the Lakshman Ghat, where his brother Lakshman bathed and about one-quarter of a mile distant, in the very heart of the city, stands the Janam Asthan, or “Birth-place temple” of Rama.”


P Carnegy was officiating Commissioner and Settlement Officer of the district. His 1870 account reads as follows:


“Ajudhia is to the Hindu what Macca is to the Mahomedan and Jerusalem to the Jews. The ancient city of Ajudhia covered an area of 48 kos (96 miles). After the fall of the last of Rama's line, Ajudhia and the royal race became a wilderness and it was converted into a jungle of sweet smelling keorah. Vikramajit restored the neglected and forest-concealed Ajudhia. Thereafter, it is mentioned that the most remarkable place was Ramkot “the strong hold of Ramchandar” which covered a large extent of ground and according to ancient manuscript it was surrounded by 20 bastions. The Janmasthan and other temples — It is locally affirmed that at the Mahomedan conquest there were three important Hindu shrines, with but few devotees attached, at Ajudhia, which was then little other than a wilderness. These were the “Janmasthan,” the Sargadwar mandir” also known as “Ram Darbar” and the “Tareta-ke-Thakur”. On the first of these the Emperor Babar built the mosque which still bears his name, A.D. 1528. On the second Aurangzeb did the same A.D. 1658-1707; and on the third that sovereign, or his predecessor, built a mosque, according to the well-known Mahomedan principle of enforcing their religion on all those whom they conquered. The Janmasthan marks the place where Ram Chandr was born. The Sargadwar is the gate through which he passed into Paradise, possibly the spot where his body was burned. The Tareta-ka-Thakur was famous as the place where Rama performed a great sacrifice, and which he commemorated by setting up there images of himself and Sita.

ALSO READ: Ayodhya dispute: Muslims feel an out of court settlement will be surrender



Babar's mosque – According to Leyden's memoirs of Babar that Emperor encamped at the junction of the Serwa and Gogra rivers two or three kos east from Ajudhia, on the 28th March 1528, and there he halted 7 or 8 days settling the surrounding country. A well known hunting ground is spoken of in that work, 7 or 8 kos above Oudh, on the banks of the Surju. It is remarkable that in all the copies of Babar's life now known, the pages that relate to his doings at Ajudhia are wanting. In two places in the Babari mosque the year in which it was built 935 H., corresponding with 1528 A.D. is carved in stone, along with inscriptions dedicated to the glory of that Emperor. If Ajudhia was then little other than a wild, it must at least have possessed a fine temple in the Janmasthan; for many of its columns are still in existence and in good preservation, having been used by the Musalmans in the construction of the Babari Mosque. These are of strong close-grained dark slate-coloured or black stone, called by the natives Kasoti (literally touch-stone,) and carved with different devices. To my thinking these strongly resemble Budhist pillars that I have seen at Benares and elsewhere. They are from seven to eight feet long, square at the base, centre and capital, and round or octagonal intermediately. The Janmasthan is within a few hundred paces of the Hanuman Garhi. In 1855 when a great rupture took place between the Hindus and Mahomedans, the former occupied the Hanuman Garhi in force, while the Musalmans took possession of the Janmasthan. The Mahomedans on that occasion actually charged up the steps of the Hanuman Garhi, but were driven back with considerable loss. The Hindus then followed up this success, and at the third attempt, took the Janmasthan, at the gate of which 75 Mahomedans are buried in the “Martyrs' grave” (Ganj-shahid.) Several of the King's Regiments were looking on all the time, but their orders were not to interfere. It is said that up to that time the Hindus and Mahomedans alike used to worship in the mosquetemple. Since British rule a railing has been put up to prevent disputes, within which in the mosque the Mahomedans pray, while outside the fence the Hindus have raised a platform on which they make their offerings.”

ALSO READ: Ayodhya verdict: Deadline for parties to submit evidence in English ends



H R Nevill’s gazetteer of 1905 and 1928 states the following:

“This desecration of the most sacred spot in the city caused great bitterness between Hindus and Musalmans. On last occasions the feeling led to bloodshed and in 1885 an open fight occurred, the Musalmans occupying the Janamsthan in force and thence making a desperate assault on the Hanuman Garhi they charged up the steps of the temple, but were driven back with considerable loss. The Hindu then made a counter attack and stormed the Janamasthan at the gate of which 75 Musalmans were buried. It is said that up to this time both Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building, but since mutiny an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the mosque and the Hindus who are forbidden access to the inner yard, make their offerings on a platform which they have raised in the outer one.”

------------------

 

[PakLFC]

It's disputed that there was a temple there, that would be why the Indian Muslims haven't agreed to it.

http://www.business-standard.com/ar...revealed-british-accounts-117120500216_1.html

Not that it's our business to tell them what to think, it's Modi's and his Hindutva battalions who must take this responsibility.

From the video's I've seen ancient Hindu texts are being found beneath the ground. Ultimately, the court should end this never ending ordeal by putting everyone out of their misery. I feel the court is frightened of the consequences after the verdict is announced. If the decision favours the Hindutva brigade they'll next be wanting to build a Mandir by demolishing the Taj Mahal.

 

[Adijazz1706]

From the video's I've seen ancient Hindu texts are being found beneath the ground. Ultimately, the court should end this never ending ordeal by putting everyone out of their misery. I feel the court is frightened of the consequences after the verdict is announced.If the decision favours the Hindutva brigade they'll next be wanting to build a Mandir by demolishing the Taj Mahal.

Itll happen if the Indian public want it to be done, majority rules in a democracy and their decision will be implemented. See also, trump and brexit

 

[Tusker]

Hindu's will claim there is , we know this alreadly. Authentic reports from history has suggested no temple, I will take this evidence . You can believe your Saffron friends.

feel free to comment on how your own Authentic reports confirm what the ASI Report says. I see you have quietly skipped that point.

The rest of your post has no relevance and I suggest try to read a little better.

it is perfectly relevant to your point you were making about preservation of life. but I can understand your reluctance to evade that topic as you have no leg to stand on and defend your frankly preposterous claim.

 

[troodon]

Itll happen if the Indian public want it to be done, majority rules in a democracy and their decision will be implemented. See also, trump and brexit

Point is, majority will and do not care if there is a temple there. They only care about when and where the next meal is going to come.

Only BJP supporters and the Hindutva Brigade will make a ruckus. Even among BJP supporters, many like me do not care about Temple. I am a BJP supporter only when it comes to defeating Congress and its cronies. Not a supporter of Mandir or Masjid.

There are thousands of Temples and Mosques all over India. One more temple or Mosque is not going to solve any issues that India is facing.

If indeed the Mosque was built on top of a temple, then the original builder is an idiot and an A-Grade shameless creature. If there was no temple under the Mosque, then the same applies to all temple supporters.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Point is, majority will and do not care if there is a temple there. They only care about when and where the next meal is going to come.

Only BJP supporters and the Hindutva Brigade will make a ruckus. Even among BJP supporters, many like me do not care about Temple. I am a BJP supporter only when it comes to defeating Congress and its cronies. Not a supporter of Mandir or Masjid.

There are thousands of Temples and Mosques all over India. One more temple or Mosque is not going to solve any issues that India is facing.

If indeed the Mosque was built on top of a temple, then the original builder is an idiot and an A-Grade shameless creature. If there was no temple under the Mosque, then the same applies to all temple supporters.

Did you vote for BJP? Will you vote for them in 2019? If yes, then you are a bjp supporter, otherwise you're not. That's all they care about, that they get enough votes to stay in power regardless of whether the voter is a single issue voter or a hardcore supporter

 

[CricketCartoons]

Did you vote for BJP? Will you vote for them in 2019? If yes, then you are a bjp supporter, otherwise you're not. That's all they care about, that they get enough votes to stay in power regardless of whether the voter is a single issue voter or a hardcore supporter

I did not vote for BJP, but will vote for them if they build the temple.

 

[Adijazz1706]

I did not vote for BJP, but will vote for them if they build the temple.

Tu na sudrega , funny as always

 

[CanadianG00se]

Lets a build a hospital, school, or university on that land where people from all faith are welcomed. If Masjid is build then Hindus will get offended and vice versa. Its better to build something that helps our future generations and creates harmony among masses.

 

[BreadPakoda]

Just read a few articles. Is it true that 30 Hindu temples in Pakistan (in a day) and 11 in Bangladesh were burnt down after the Babri demolition?

Any one who knows what the geopolitical situation was back then? I doubt Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims are as much concerned about Indian Muslims nowadays.

 

[Arham_PakFan]

Babri Masjid Was Destroyed By "Hindu Taliban", Supreme Court Told

Advocate Rajeev Dhavan also questioned the locus of Shia Central Waqf Board in the case

New Delhi: The Babri Masjid was destroyed by the "Hindu Taliban" just like the demolition of the Buddha statue by the Taliban at Bamiyan in Afghanistan, a litigant in the Ayodhya temple-mosque land dispute case told the Supreme Court today.

No law or the Constitution allows destruction of religious structures of any faith, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the legal heirs of M Siddiq -- one of the original litigants in the case and has died, told a bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

Mr Dhavan also questioned the locus of the Shia Central Waqf Board in the case.

His comments came after the Shia board told the bench that it was willing to donate one-third of the disputed land, which the Allahabad High Court had given to the Muslims, to the Hindu group for "peace, harmony, unity and integrity" in this great country.

The counsel for the Shia Central Waqf Board said they were the claimants of the Muslim share of land at the disputed Ayodhya site, as the Babri Masjid was built by Mir Baki, a Shia Muslim.

"It is a fundamental issue. The Shia Central Waqf Board has decided that for the unity, integrity, peace and harmony of the country, we want to donate the one-third part of land to the Hindu group," the lawyer said.

Mr Dhavan, who initially said he would not respond to innuendos, later countered the Shia board's submissions and said it was way back in 1946 that the Babri Masjid was held to be a Sunni mosque.

"You cannot argue that this (demolition of mosque) was by some miscreants," he said, adding, "What had happened in 1992? The Bamiyan statue was destroyed by the Taliban and this mosque was destroyed by Hindu Taliban. It cannot be done. It should not have been done. No one can do this".

He argued that those who destroyed the mosque should be barred from making any claim since "no one has the right to destroy a mosque or any other religious structures."

"The simple argument is that the fact that a mosque is destroyed does not conclude the argument of right to prayer," he said.

Mr Dhavan said the Shia board's argument that it wanted to donate a share of the land to the Hindu group was like "indulging in a non-existent act of charity".

He also questioned the "intervention" of an Additional Solicitor General (ASG), who was appearing for Uttar Pradesh government, in the matter and said that arguments by the law officer were "uncalled" for.

On July 6, the UP government had told the apex court that some Muslim groups were trying to delay the hearing in the "long-pending" land dispute case by seeking reconsideration of an observation in the 1994 verdict in M Ismail Faruqui case that a mosque was not integral to Islam.

During the arguments today, Mr Dhavan said there was "no delay" on their part in the matter and the UP government was supposed to "remain neutral" in the dispute.

He said that after the Mr Faruqui case verdict, no occasion arose to ask for setting aside or modification of this judgement and, as per this verdict, the Centre was to act as an statutory receiver of the disputed land.

"That neutrality (of UP) has been broken by the ASG. The ASG is the Additional Solicitor General of the Government of India. Union of India has to act as an statutory receiver. It does not lie in the mouth of an officer of the Government of India to say that it (matter) is delayed and there is no bonafide," he said, adding, "it is simply impermissible and and a breach of faith of this court".

He said the issue of Mr Faruqui's verdict was raised by the opposite parties in the suits before the high court.

Mr Dhavan also countered the arguments advanced by the Hindu group about "pilgrimage" and said as per their submissions, the Muslims do not have the right under Article 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion).

He said if arguments by Hindu group was to be accepted, then Christians might be asked to go directly to the Pope for prayers and Sikhs could be asked to go only to the Golden Temple at Amritsar.

At the outset, the Shia Central Waqf Board said the matter should not be referred to a larger bench for any reconsideration of the observations made in Faruqui's verdict.

The Muslim groups have argued before the bench that the "sweeping" observation of the apex court in the verdict needed to be reconsidered by a five-judge bench as "it had and will have a bearing" on Babri Masjid-Ram Temple land dispute case.

Mr Dhavan had earlier termed the Allahabad High Court's verdict of dividing the 2.77 acre disputed Ayodhya land equally among the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla as "panchayat decision".

Earlier, Hindu groups had opposed the plea of their Muslim counterparts that the 1994 verdict holding that a mosque was not integral to the prayers offered by the followers of Islam be referred to a larger bench.

A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had in 2010 ordered that the land be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/bab...d-by-hindu-taliban-supreme-court-told-1883015

 

[Gabbar Singh]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Indian Muslims ready to give up claims on Babri mosque <a href="https://t.co/vzEBF9EP5k">https://t.co/vzEBF9EP5k</a></p>— Gulf News (@gulf_news) <a href="https://twitter.com/gulf_news/status/1150706235248975872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 15, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Slog]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Indian Muslims ready to give up claims on Babri mosque <a href="https://t.co/vzEBF9EP5k">https://t.co/vzEBF9EP5k</a></p>— Gulf News (@gulf_news) <a href="https://twitter.com/gulf_news/status/1150706235248975872?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 15, 2019</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

This comes across as a move out of resignation and a sad acceptance defeat

 

[Slog]

Why are people in the first page acting as if Babri masjid has no significance to South Asian muslims. It was one of the first mosques in the region and the first by the greatest Muslim empire in the subcontinent

It has emotional significance to muslims

 

[Gabbar Singh]

This comes across as a move out of resignation and a sad acceptance defeat

Perhaps but what they’re getting in return, if the the reports are accurate, is worth a lot. It’s a clever move imo.

 

[moghul]

Time for Muslims to accept the defeat, Hindu won, congratulations.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Why are people in the first page acting as if Babri masjid has no significance to South Asian muslims. It was one of the first mosques in the region and the first by the greatest Muslim empire in the subcontinent

It has emotional significance to muslims

Firstly, the only muslims whose opinion matter in this case are the Indian muslims and not all south asian muslims.

Secondly this place is of religious significance to Hindus, according to hindu faith its the birth place of Lord Ram. So when deciding about a religious issue, religious significance holds higher stature than emotional one.

Thirdly, a structure erected by demolishing a religious structure of another religion is a sign of tyranny, brutality and intoletance.

The so called greatest muslim empire was preceded by a long list of hindu empires which ruled India, so that matters too.

Lastly, a long list of mosques that have been demolished in muslim countries for varioys reasons. Some of which were centuries old.

 

[Suleiman]

Pathetic, really sad. You can look at it from a religious POV, but even from a neutral POV, destroying a piece of history that shows our heritage as South Asians, let alone as Indians or Pakistanis.

Europe is trying to preserve its historical monuments, yet we're seeing pathetic point scoring in this backward third world part of the world.

 

[Gharib Aadmi]

This is a letter than Babur wrote to Humayun:

"Oh my son! The realm of Hindustan is full of diverse creeds. Praise be to God, the Righteous, the Glorious, the Highest, that He hath granted unto thee the Empire of it. It is but proper that you, with heart cleansed of all religious bigotry, should dispense justice according to the tenets of each community. And in particular refrain from the sacrifice of cow, for that way lies the conquest of the hearts of the people of Hindustan; and the subjects of the realm will, through royal favour, be devoted to thee. And the temples and abodes of worship of every community under Imperial sway, you should not damage. Dispense justice so that the sovereign may be happy with the subjects and likewise the subjects with their sovereign. The progress of Islam is better by the sword of kindness, not by the sword of oppression.
Ignore the disputations of Shias and Sunnis; for therein is the weakness of Islam. And bring together the subjects with different beliefs in the manner of the Four Elements, so that the body-politic may be immune from the various ailments. And remember the deeds of Hazrat Taimur Sahib Qiran (Lord of the conjuction) so that you may become mature in matters of Government. And on us is but the duty to advise."


Does this sound like someone who would destroy another religions holy site?

This is an awful decision to concede the mosque. Not only is it an unfair slur on the reputation of the founder of the greatest empire in Subcontinent History, but it will lead to more mosques being destroyed in the future. Appeasement does not work.

I really hope this story is not true.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is a letter than Babur wrote to Humayun:

"Oh my son! The realm of Hindustan is full of diverse creeds. Praise be to God, the Righteous, the Glorious, the Highest, that He hath granted unto thee the Empire of it. It is but proper that you, with heart cleansed of all religious bigotry, should dispense justice according to the tenets of each community. And in particular refrain from the sacrifice of cow, for that way lies the conquest of the hearts of the people of Hindustan; and the subjects of the realm will, through royal favour, be devoted to thee. And the temples and abodes of worship of every community under Imperial sway, you should not damage. Dispense justice so that the sovereign may be happy with the subjects and likewise the subjects with their sovereign. The progress of Islam is better by the sword of kindness, not by the sword of oppression.
Ignore the disputations of Shias and Sunnis; for therein is the weakness of Islam. And bring together the subjects with different beliefs in the manner of the Four Elements, so that the body-politic may be immune from the various ailments. And remember the deeds of Hazrat Taimur Sahib Qiran (Lord of the conjuction) so that you may become mature in matters of Government. And on us is but the duty to advise."


Does this sound like someone who would destroy another religions holy site?

This is an awful decision to concede the mosque. Not only is it an unfair slur on the reputation of the founder of the greatest empire in Subcontinent History, but it will lead to more mosques being destroyed in the future. Appeasement does not work.

I really hope this story is not true.

Even if this mediation story is untrue, the court will likely grant Hindus the area under which Archaelogical excavations found remains of the hindu temple.

 

[Lonewarrior]

as expected, sums up the Indian muslims situation in India.
you all just give up.

 

[Madplayer]

Ayodhya land dispute: SC to hear mediation report at 2 pm on Friday

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.in...n-report-at-2-pm-on-friday-1576104-2019-08-01

 

[Abdullah719]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Only a barbaric society forcefully imposes its majoritarian whims like this! <a href="https://t.co/2zjEJ4ht6b">https://t.co/2zjEJ4ht6b</a></p>— Ashok Swain (@ashoswai) <a href="https://twitter.com/ashoswai/status/1174663091939872773?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 19, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Gabbar Singh]

They should build a hospital, university, homeless shelter or something else useful on this site. Ayodhya is a big city, there's plenty of space of build a temple or mosque elsewhere.

 

[cricketjoshila]

They should build a hospital, university, homeless shelter or something else useful on this site. Ayodhya is a big city, there's plenty of space of build a temple or mosque elsewhere.

According to Hindu belief, thats the site where Lord Ram was born. Thats why it is to be the site of the temple.

 

[MenInG]

According to Hindu belief, thats the site where Lord Ram was born. Thats why it is to be the site of the temple.

And that gives the right to destroy a building.

 

[cricketjoshila]

And that gives the right to destroy a building.

What right did person who demolished the temple had to demolish it and build his own building there?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

According to Hindu belief, thats the site where Lord Ram was born. Thats why it is to be the site of the temple.

They will be finding mosques built on former Ram temples in every street given another decade or so.

 

[Romali_rotti]

They will be finding mosques built on former Ram temples in every street given another decade or so.

For a supposed Brit, it seems more and more like you are typing from a village in Pakistan .. Whats going on here Cap.. :

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

For a supposed Brit, it seems more and more like you are typing from a village in Pakistan .. Whats going on here Cap.. :

My keen sense of ground realities is touching a few nerves.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

What right did person who demolished the temple had to demolish it and build his own building there?

Which temple would that be then?
Read the article from The HuffPost above where two Indian archaeologists dismiss the ASI reports as false.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Which temple would that be then?
Read the article from The HuffPost above where two Indian archaeologists dismiss the ASI reports as false.

Two Archaelogists who neither were part of the excavations and nor did they get access to the material.

ASI is the Archaelogical survey of India, and they did the excavation under a court order and monitoring, so two random people saying something to Huff post doesnot change anything.

 

[cricketjoshila]

They will be finding mosques built on former Ram temples in every street given another decade or so.

Given that temple existed in this country long before Islam arrived,and given the history of islamic conquerors of converting or destroying places of worship of other religions,nothing will surprise me.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Two Archaelogists who neither were part of the excavations and nor did they get access to the material.

ASI is the Archaelogical survey of India, and they did the excavation under a court order and monitoring, so two random people saying something to Huff post doesnot change anything.

Sorry correction. They represented the muslim parties as observers at the excavations, so they ratted the view of their employers.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Two Archaelogists who neither were part of the excavations and nor did they get access to the material.

ASI is the Archaelogical survey of India, and they did the excavation under a court order and monitoring, so two random people saying something to Huff post doesnot change anything.

You didn’t bother to read the article did you?
From the article:

The archeologists, who were observers during the excavation

ASI, then under the Bharatiya Janata Party-led (BJP-led) National Democratic Alliance government, was under pressure to reinforce the Hindu right-wing narrative that Mughal emperor Babur's general Mir Baqi knocked down a temple to build a mosque on the spot where Hindu god Ram was born.

This is in the first few paragraphs of that article and lays to waste your biased opinions.

Come back with some actual facts not BJP manufactured Hindutva propaganda.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Sorry correction. They represented the muslim parties as observers at the excavations, so they ratted the view of their employers.

There are three things. What the ASI has excavated is not evidence there was a temple underneath the mosque. One is this western wall, the second are these 50 pillar bases and third are architectural fragments. The western wall is a feature of a mosque. It is a wall in front of which you say namaaz. It is not the feature of a temple. Temple has a very different plan. Underneath the Babri Masjid, there are actually older mosques.

Now, as far as these pillar bases are concerned, these are completely fabricated and we filed many complaints to the court about it. Our argument is that if you look at what they are claiming to be pillar bases, these are pieces of broken bricks and they have mud inside them. There is no way a pillar can even stand on it, it is so unstable. It's a completely political issue. They wanted that report to say there are pillar bases and it said there are pillar bases.

The so called Ram mandir was actually older smaller mosques that were expanded over time due to the increasing Muslim population.
No evidence at all of a temple.
How can the ASI report be taken seriously when the guy in charge B.R Mani was removed from his position by an order made by the Allahabad HC?

 

[KingKhanWC]

The so called Ram mandir was actually older smaller mosques that were expanded over time due to the increasing Muslim population.
No evidence at all of a temple.
How can the ASI report be taken seriously when the guy in charge B.R Mani was removed from his position by an order made by the Allahabad HC?

There was no temple, this is just Hindu extremists in action.

 

[cricketjoshila]

You didn’t bother to read the article did you?
From the article:




This is in the first few paragraphs of that article and lays to waste your biased opinions.

Come back with some actual facts not BJP manufactured Hindutva propaganda.

Those are accusations of people who represented the muslim side.

Come back with something better.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The so called Ram mandir was actually older smaller mosques that were expanded over time due to the increasing Muslim population.
No evidence at all of a temple.
How can the ASI report be taken seriously when the guy in charge B.R Mani was removed from his position by an order made by the Allahabad HC?

Those are the views of archaelogists hired by the Sunni board, the ASI is the authority.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Those are the views of archaelogists hired by the Sunni board, the ASI is the authority.

ASI is not an independent body it reports to the Ministry of Culture and with the NDA at the helm there was open conjecture that the data would be manipulated. The final report confirmed this.
The two archaeologists representing the SWB had nothing to gain by exposing the ethical codes and procedures that were violated, they had everything to lose though because by antagonising the ASI they were risking their careers as ASI have to give permission for future excavation work.

Here’s an eye-opening section from the article:

In the EPW report, you write about being concerned about certain procedures?

Yes. They are claiming that this is the site of Ram Temple, which is a Vaishnav temple, where generally, you would not expect to find any bones because of this vegetarianism etcetera, but when they started excavating, they started finding a lot of bones, animal bones. How do you explain finding animal bones in a Vaishnav temple? They clearly did not want that recorded. So, we noticed that the labour they had hired were just throwing the bones away. The other thing they were also doing, there is a certain pottery, ceramic type, which is known as glazed ware, which is generally associated with Muslim communities. They were finding a lot of this glazed ware. Those again were being thrown. So, we made a complaint, and they had to be recorded. You would not expect glazed ware in a Vaishnav temple. Procedurally, there was violation of an ethical code.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Those are the views of archaelogists hired by the Sunni board, the ASI is the authority.

Not to mention the head of this excavation B.R Mani was asked to step aside by order of Allahabad HC.

Plain to see that the ASI were providing a report that fulfilled the BJP led NDA narrative in order to justify the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

 

[WhenSultansBowled]

Fanaticism is bad. Its biggest defect is that it is self-confirming.


It took RSS and the Muslim killer Modi some decades, but they got India right where they wanted.

From this point in history; nothing is surprising and these Hindutva zealots will never be reasoned with. Bad times for Kashmiris and other Muslims in Mahan India!

 

[GBK_Fan]

This is going to blow up badly in the face of the Muslim personal law board. They have over the years used a number or underhand tactics to delay the hearing/offering to go for mediation and then backing out etc This has only emboldened the hard wing on the Hindu side and I don’t expect this to end with Ayodhya.

As for people who are questioning why don’t Hindus give up one of their holiest sites, why don’t you ask yourself that question in relation to Jerusalem?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Not to mention the head of this excavation B.R Mani was asked to step aside by order of Allahabad HC.

Plain to see that the ASI were providing a report that fulfilled the BJP led NDA narrative in order to justify the demolition of the Babri Masjid.

The court took decision that it felt were necessary to make the excavation process neutral as the Muslim observers had complained againist him. The report came under another Archealogist.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

The court took decision that it felt were necessary to make the excavation process neutral as the Muslim observers had complained againist him. The report came under another Archealogist.

Thanks for confirming that the original head of the excavation was a BJP puppet who violated known protocols with the aim of producing a report that fitted their narrative.

On this basis the ASI excavation is not fit for purpose as highlighted by independent experts in the HuffPost article.

Nothing further to add unless you can provide proofs that refute the many claims made by these professionals.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Thanks for confirming that the original head of the excavation was a BJP puppet who violated known protocols with the aim of producing a report that fitted their narrative.

On this basis the ASI excavation is not fit for purpose as highlighted by independent experts in the HuffPost article.

Nothing further to add unless you can provide proofs that refute the many claims made by these professionals.

The original head was replaced so that muslim side couldnot point fingers. The muslim side thought that by getting one head removed they would be able to pressurise the next head to toe their line. Didnot happen.

Independent experts? Lol. They were experts of the muslim parties.

The court accepted the report and thsts final. Huff post is not the authority. Nor are the experts that muslims put up. The court accepted it.

Based on the ASI report, as accepted by the Allahabad HC, there was a temple which was razed and a mosque was built over it.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is going to blow up badly in the face of the Muslim personal law board. They have over the years used a number or underhand tactics to delay the hearing/offering to go for mediation and then backing out etc This has only emboldened the hard wing on the Hindu side and I don’t expect this to end with Ayodhya.

As for people who are questioning why don’t Hindus give up one of their holiest sites, why don’t you ask yourself that question in relation to Jerusalem?

AIMPLB have blackmailed enough govts and even threatened violence. Non of that will work anymore.

 

[GBK_Fan]

AIMPLB have blackmailed enough govts and even threatened violence. Non of that will work anymore.

Yeah that’s exactly why they have requested a meditation again when the court case is proceeding well. They know the CJ will retire in November and want to stall it till he goes

 

[Iqbal'sh]

The original head was replaced so that muslim side couldnot point fingers. The muslim side thought that by getting one head removed they would be able to pressurise the next head to toe their line. Didnot happen.

Independent experts? Lol. They were experts of the muslim parties.

The court accepted the report and thsts final. Huff post is not the authority. Nor are the experts that muslims put up. The court accepted it.

Based on the ASI report, as accepted by the Allahabad HC, there was a temple which was razed and a mosque was built over it.

As I thought no counter to the points raised by the archeologists in the article. Confirms that the ASI report was a work of fiction to fit with the BJP narrative.

 

[cricketjoshila]

As I thought no counter to the points raised by the archeologists in the article. Confirms that the ASI report was a work of fiction to fit with the BJP narrative.

Points raised by muslim party archaelogist were already rejected by the court.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Points raised by muslim party archaelogist were already rejected by the court.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Read the judgement of the allahabad HC of 2010.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Read the judgement of the allahabad HC of 2010.

No evidence then as I thought.
I’m not interested in the HC verdict unless the judges dissected the claims made by the independent archaeologists, however you already know this did not happen.

As I stated before a fabricated report by an authority that was under the jurisdiction of the BJP led government, with the head being replaced halfway through the excavation for violating standard procedures. Conveniently being bought back into the fold by Modi as a DG for the National Museum of India.

Only a die-hard Hindutva can claim the whole process as somehow legitimate. You have nothing to counter any of the evidence provided.

 

[SakunaPataka]

As I thought no counter to the points raised by the archeologists in the article. Confirms that the ASI report was a work of fiction to fit with the BJP narrative.

Work of fiction ehh ?

Including these is suppose ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#2003:_The_ASI_report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#Some_results_of_the_2003_ASI_report


"More than 30 pillar bases have been found at equal spans. The pillar-bases are in two rows and the rows are parallel. The pillar-base rows are in North-South direction. A wall is superimposed upon another wall. At least three layers of the floor are visible. An octagonal holy fireplace (Yagna Kund) was found. These facts prove the enormity of the pre-existing structure"

In B4 you come back with the usual response: "wikipedia is not evidence"

 

[cricketjoshila]

No evidence then as I thought.
I’m not interested in the HC verdict unless the judges dissected the claims made by the independent archaeologists, however you already know this did not happen.

As I stated before a fabricated report by an authority that was under the jurisdiction of the BJP led government, with the head being replaced halfway through the excavation for violating standard procedures. Conveniently being bought back into the fold by Modi as a DG for the National Museum of India.

Only a die-hard Hindutva can claim the whole process as somehow legitimate. You have nothing to counter any of the evidence provided.

No evidence?

Lol. The court accepted the report and rejected the view of the experts of the muslim side.

BR Mani was removed in 2003.Allahabad HC verdict came in 2010. Modi was elected in 2014. How is this connected?

Whats your evidence? Views of experts of muslim side? The view the court rejected?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Work of fiction ehh ?

Including these is suppose ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#2003:_The_ASI_report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#Some_results_of_the_2003_ASI_report


"More than 30 pillar bases have been found at equal spans. The pillar-bases are in two rows and the rows are parallel. The pillar-base rows are in North-South direction. A wall is superimposed upon another wall. At least three layers of the floor are visible. An octagonal holy fireplace (Yagna Kund) was found. These facts prove the enormity of the pre-existing structure"

In B4 you come back with the usual response: "wikipedia is not evidence"

The experts on the muslim side ratted the view of their retainers. The Allahabad HC rejected it in 2010. Suddenly Huff post finds it relevant in 2018.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Work of fiction ehh ?

Including these is suppose ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#2003:_The_ASI_report
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeology_of_Ayodhya#Some_results_of_the_2003_ASI_report


"More than 30 pillar bases have been found at equal spans. The pillar-bases are in two rows and the rows are parallel. The pillar-base rows are in North-South direction. A wall is superimposed upon another wall. At least three layers of the floor are visible. An octagonal holy fireplace (Yagna Kund) was found. These facts prove the enormity of the pre-existing structure"

In B4 you come back with the usual response: "wikipedia is not evidence"

The HuffPost article calls it a work of fiction and contradicts the so called evidence you provided via Wikipedia. I prefer to believe professionals rather than a website accessible and editable by Hindutva stooges.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Can you explain the following
From the wiki link you posted:

Earlier excavations had unearthed animal bones and even human remains which could not have been there if the place was indeed a temple. Presence of animal bones meant that it was a residential area (and not a shrine) inhabited by a non-vegetarian community. And that it was in that Muslim habitat that a mosque was raised in 1528 or thereafter. The ASI report mentions the bones, but does not explain how they came to be there.[16]

The only evidence the ASI found were some pillar bases, this is what wiki link has to say (it kind of confirms what the archaeologists in the HuffPost article claim):

Pillar bases were first discovered by the ASI's former director-general, B.B. Lal, in 1975. His report gave an enormous boost to the Ram Temple cause. It was however criticised by archaeologist D. Mandal. In the excavation of 2003, fifty of the "pillar bases" were once again unearthed. Although they appear to be aligned, D. Mandal's conclusion by archaeological theory stated that the "pillar bases" belonged to different periods; that is, they had never existed together at any point of time; they were not really in alignment with one another; they were not even pillar bases, but junctions of walls, bases of the load-bearing columns at the intersections of walls.

 

[SakunaPataka]

Can you explain the following
From the wiki link you posted:




The only evidence the ASI found were some pillar bases, this is what wiki link has to say (it kind of confirms what the archaeologists in the HuffPost article claim):

Not sure why my post was deleted but before I respond to this ... are you now suddenly accepting wiki as a reliable source ? Let me know before I spend time answering.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

Not sure why my post was deleted but before I respond to this ... are you now suddenly accepting wiki as a reliable source ? Let me know before I spend time answering.

If you had bothered to read the HuffPost article you would know that these same issues were raised there as well.
Since [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] has not been able to answer maybe you can enlighten me

 

[SakunaPataka]

If you had bothered to read the HuffPost article you would know that these same issues were raised there as well.
Since [MENTION=76058]cricketjoshila[/MENTION] has not been able to answer maybe you can enlighten me

i will most certainly enlighten you as soon as we agree upon a source which we can refer to. What is it going to be ? Choices are 1. Huffpost 2. wikipedia 3. Allahabad HC Verdict which is based on ASI Verdict.

Let me know and we can discuss to our hearts content.

 

[Iqbal'sh]

i will most certainly enlighten you as soon as we agree upon a source which we can refer to. What is it going to be ? Choices are 1. Huffpost 2. wikipedia 3. Allahabad HC Verdict which is based on ASI Verdict.

Let me know and we can discuss to our hearts content.

The issues bought up by the independent archaeologists are mentioned in the HuffPost article and touched upon in the Wikipedia link.
Read the HuffPost article and counter the many claims made in it with evidence from informed sources.