Jump to content

Ayodhya Verdict


Global.Baba

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dial_100 said:

Very immature approach from the other community. Ram mandir should have been built 50-60 years ago.

Yes, when Somnath Templle was re-built. Secularism/Nehruvinism is bane of India, we should have de-colonized in 1947, but we have now western-educated colonial apologists still arguing about the evils of Hinduism. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, coffee_rules said:

Yes, when Somnath Templle was re-built. Secularism/Nehruvinism is bane of India, we should have de-colonized in 1947, but we have now western-educated colonial apologists still arguing about the evils of Hinduism. 

How about the ones getting practical education by spending a few days in a Ashram or traveling on motorcycles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dial_100 said:

Very immature approach from the other community. Ram mandir should have been built 50-60 years ago.

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

which is why, SC should delay, dismiss, delay etc. There are no practical benefits to this and only practical badness. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

They would go like Krishnabhoomi, where the birth olace is right under a mosque, they will decide to build a ram temple  and a mosque in the complex. Hindus will grudgingly tolerate it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Catch 22 situation.

 

In a parallel universe, if the Sunni Waqf board did give up claim to the land, the Hindu Mahasabha would be admitting that the Waqf board indeed had a claim to relinquish.

 

Anyways, Waqf board should have given up claim regardless post Independence. It would have been a great act of reconciliation. Now, after the demolition of the Masjid, there is no way that the Waqf board can give up claim. It would make them even more irrelevant to the wider Muslim community.

 

IMO, a verdict on the case is going to be bad news for the nation. If the Hindu Mahasabha wins, it sets a very bad precedent. That you can break a religious structure and have the courts rule in your favour.

If the Waqf board wins, we could look at a lord Ram Janmabhoomi movement all over again. And the repercussions associated with it.

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Singh bling said:

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

There are hideous efforts to involve western chut*iya indologists who have tried to white-wash the moghul crimes. There is vigorous effort to revise Islam conquests in India using such Indologists like Richard Eaton who says some 80 temples were only destroyed and not like 50000+ like Hindus claim!

 

https://thedebateinitiative.com/2016/01/11/the-myth-of-destroyed-hindu-temples-and-forced-conversion-of-hindus-by-historical-muslim-rulers-of-india/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, dial_100 said:

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

wb has no argument in this case. They were only pressurized by Commie historians from AMU/JNU and some western Indologists like Sheldon Pollock to fight a case of Babri being on vacant land. There is enough historical evidence to prove there was a temple there and hence the Allahabad HC judgement was kind of In favor of Hindus. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Singh bling said:

The problem is not Ram temple or religious place.The problem is history.Till date I have hardly seen any muslim community representative who accept that  Muslims did commit atrocities in India on Hindu's .The problem is Muslim representative openly say that Aurangzeb was hero . There were never temples broken , there were never forced conversions. In this scenario both communities can hardly live in peace .Hindu's will always demand back their temples which were broken while Muslims will keep denying it

The so called 'representatives' of the Muslim community not only accept that there were atrocities, but some of them tend to gloat over it too. It is sickening.  But what has that to do with the verdict? Which 'representative' has a case going on wrt Babri Masjid/ lord Ram Janmabhoomi issue?

Who exactly is a Muslim community representative? For integration into the mainstream it s necessary that people have representatives on the basis of the work they do and not on the basis of their religious affiliation.

11 hours ago, dial_100 said:

I aint ardent hindu, actually i dont consider myself one but I am definitely Ram bhakt to the core. The highlighted parts suggest that waqf board is only fighting it for the heck of it. This very attitude best accounts for the ayodhya issue. WB is trying to spread this fear in the minds of common muslims is pure politics and their religious agenda. What surprises me that even educated lot falls trap to this propaganda. With this attitude of wb, nobody from the community feels awkward or doesnt want to leave the country and doesnt feel that wb's behavior portray intolerance.  Even elites of the community are silent spectators. 

 

very immature madamji. 

Sir, you may call me all the names that you wish to. But some basic premises about this case.

1-The Waqf board is doing what is kind of its stated job. It is the precise reason that the state governments has instituted this board on the basis of the Waqf Act.. To regulate and maintain Waqf property issues both movable and immovable. Of course, you can pose the question: should they be taking the fight to the Supreme Court? Ideally not. Give up all claim. But they are well within their rights to fight it out. 

2-Waqf board is not spreading fear/hatred in the minds of common Muslims. If anything, the act of demolition of the Masjid did that. Since we are on this topic, the massive political gain because of the Babri Masjid demolition was for the BJP. And that too can be a cause of fear. 

3-Waqf board's case is basically that of a title deed. The Waqf board or its predecessor organization has not changed the status quo. Their case so far has been to challenge the changes in status quo.

4- Every action of the Waqf board has been completely constitutional. Yet you choose to vilify them, of all people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

wb has no argument in this case. They were only pressurized by Commie historians from AMU/JNU and some western Indologists like Sheldon Pollock to fight a case of Babri being on vacant land. There is enough historical evidence to prove there was a temple there and hence the Allahabad HC judgement was kind of In favor of Hindus. 

IIRC, Waqf and/or its predecessor has filed various cases over ownership of the plot in the Faizabad District court right from the 1950s. Most of these cases are still languishing in those courts. I think these cases predate what AMU/JNU or commie historians as you put it have said on the issue.

And its not just the Waqf Board which has insisted that the case be taken to the SC. Even the Hindu Mahasabha has done the same.

 

This a long drawn case, the dynamics of which have vastly changed after the demolition of the Masjid. It isn't as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mariyam said:

IIRC, Waqf and/or its predecessor has filed various cases over ownership of the plot in the Faizabad District court right from the 1950s. Most of these cases are still languishing in those courts. I think these cases predate what AMU/JNU or commie historians as you put it have said on the issue.

And its not just the Waqf Board which has insisted that the case be taken to the SC. Even the Hindu Mahasabha has done the same.

 

This a long drawn case, the dynamics of which have vastly changed after the demolition of the Masjid. It isn't as simplistic as you are making it out to be.

You should read Meenakshi Jain book on this subject. The Historical evidence I speak about is from 1870 onwards. British, FWIW, have maintained civic records on this site, has been extensively used in the Prayagraj HC verdict of 2010.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...