Ayodhya Verdict

[Straight Drive]

On 11/6/2018 at 10:53 PM, Moochad said:

What's worse is this cartoon had the gall to try to send the Hindu and Sikh refugees back to Pakistan after they came to India as refugees  

 

Not to mention he actively recruited soldiers on behalf of the British before as well... Then he suddenly discovers non-violence. 

Was not aware regarding this.  What actually is this about.

[rkt.india]

I bet 99.99 percent Hindus in India have no idea about Manusmriti and i can bet 99.99 percent Muslim read Quran regularly.  Manusmriti is absolutely irrelevant.  

[Mariyam]

On 11/2/2018 at 11:20 PM, coffee_rules said:

How do they claim rights to the land? There was no wakf board when Babar demolished the Ram temple and built a moque on it's land. Does Wakf board have the right to own, Jumma Masjid in Delhi/Agra, Taj Mahal, etc?

 

The Waqf board is contesting claim by saying that the property would have been a Waqf property and a due waqfnama would have been signed by those who constructed the Masjid saying that they are giving this place up for prayers for the common people. There are many cases about this right from the 1950s in the Faizabad Court, but there has been no verdict, either way, so far.

 

The Waqf board wasn't around at the time of Babr, but the concept of Waqf/Habus property is a part of classical Islamic jurisprudence. 

 

Waqf board has no right to the Taj Mahal, because there is no chance that Shah Jahan would have signed any such waqfnama. That would be a preposterous claim on their behalf.

[Alam_dar]

2 hours ago, rkt.india said:

I bet 99.99 percent Hindus in India have no idea about Manusmriti and i can bet 99.99 percent Muslim read Quran regularly.  Manusmriti is absolutely irrelevant.  

99% Indian Muslims read Quran, but understand not a single Arabic word.

 

Any how, Islam is a separate issue. 

 

Coming back to Hinduism and Manusmriti, although 99% Hindus have neither read it, nor many other Hindu sacred books, still the effect of Manusmriti has been very strong upon the Hindu society for the last 2 thousand plus years. Hindu society faced the worst kind of caste system. It still exist today in whole of India and still Dalits are not considered good enough to be married in the upper caste families. And in the rural areas, situation is much worst. And all Commissions reported discrimination against the Dalits. 

 

Therefore , in my opinion, although 99% Hindus don't read Manusmriti, but again 99% of them still follow the Manusmriti in form of caste system. The walls of caste system have become weaker, but they are still there. 

Edited November 8, 2018 by Alam_dar

[Alam_dar]

4 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

My last on this subject. Nobody is following the caste system by reading or following Manu smruti. It is not equivalent to the verses in Quran. So GFYS.

I don't know why you and Moochad become so angry when one criticizes the religion during the discussion? Is it really necessary to start abusing others? This very same behaviour is shown by the right wing Muslims too who again become furious whenever their religion is discussed and criticized. 

[mishra]

5 hours ago, rkt.india said:

I bet 99.99 percent Hindus in India have no idea about Manusmriti and i can bet 99.99 percent Muslim read Quran regularly.  Manusmriti is absolutely irrelevant.  

0.01% is too high. I will say 1 million have ever read Manusmriti.

 

But I think we should stop celeberating Diwali

[Mariyam]

6 hours ago, mishra said:

0.01% is too high. I will say 1 million have ever read Manusmriti.

 

But I think we should stop celeberating Diwali

 

[sandeep]

On 11/2/2018 at 1:44 AM, Muloghonto said:

Somewhere along the lines, Indian generalship just lost its edge and by the time the muslims arrived, they fought with this stupid concept of 'fair fight' and all that nonsense to feel stupidly proud about.

Happens to all civilizations.  You prosper over a longer period, you get fat and weak.  That's just the cyclical nature of things.  

[mishra]

On 11/8/2018 at 7:19 PM, Mariyam said:

 

Feel bad, there is too much politics on issue of single temple on birth place of Lord Ram and smart asses of Supreme Court , ie modern gods have forgotten, they may be athiest but rest of India is not.

So why celebrate something on aniversary of some pointless person or event, let modern gods decide what should be done.

Have lost all faith in judiciary and hope in India. To me, probably its easier to find honest politician then a honest judge

[Tibarn]

On 11/6/2018 at 2:26 PM, Moochad said:

Nah, only to people lacking IQ.  Everyone else knows that Gandhi was a politician like all others.

 

It makes much more sense to judge someone as a politician than a so-called "Mahatma". I am not sure which qualities of his are considered those which make him a Mahatma, but any discussion of his "Mahatma"- hood must first come with certain ground-rules, the most prominent of which should be determining an answer to the question: What qualities make someone a Mahatma?

 

Other questions can be: Are the same qualities which supposedly make Gandhi a "Mahatma" required for another person to be considered a "Mahatma"? If his qualities make him a Mahatma, should other people or even policies follow the "Mahatma's" example?, and maybe a few other questions. 

 

To me, someone who says something like this...

 

... is so moronic that he could never be a Mahatma! Judging by his own words and some of what has been written by him, it seems the non-violence spiel is part of his fascination with Russian Christianity and his own Messiah-complex. 

 

On 11/6/2018 at 6:12 PM, Moochad said:

From Anglo-Maratha Relations 1798-1830

We are fighting for Swarajya and Swadharma

Jay Bhavani! Jay Shivaji  (BTW I noticed you got one or two of those snippets from a certain blog ).

The IoI types like Romila Thapar et al attempt to hide history is disgusting, but it is understandable. A legion of loafers whose existence relies on these lies and largess from some politicians are only expected to hide history from the common folk, IMO.

 

This is as big a lie as these fake-historians hiding the truth about Akbar! If that truth came out, on a large scale, it would trigger so many of opinions people have about Akbar. Some of the people who hate him would soften, and probably almost all the people who support him will drop him from the IoI pantheon as fast as the Joker would drop a sack of puppies off the Empire State Building.    

 

 

On 11/6/2018 at 12:02 PM, Moochad said:

And you are the cartoon who accused another poster @Tibarnof planning on killing you with conservative Pakistanis. Pot meet kettle.  

I'm not sure why you are indulging @AlamDarr again and again... It was clear from the previous run in with him that he isn't interested in conversing or understanding a perspective different from his own. He is interested in everybody listening to him.  

 

If you disagree with him, you are planning on killing him.

Edited November 20, 2018 by Tibarn

[Moochad]

58 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

... is so moronic that he could never be a Mahatma! Judging by his own words and some of what has been written by him, it seems the non-violence spiel is part of his fascination with Russian Christianity and his own Messiah-complex. 

What's that all about?

 

58 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

This is as big a lie as these fake-historians hiding the truth about Akbar! If that truth came out, on a large scale, it would trigger so many of opinions people have about Akbar. Some of the people who hate him would soften, and probably almost all the people who support him will drop him from the IoI pantheon as fast as the Joker would drop a sack of puppies off the Empire State Building.    

I'm almost afraid to ask, what exactly is hidden about Akbar? 

[Tibarn]

7 minutes ago, Moochad said:

What's that all about?

It would be good to read some dedicated articles on this. Read through this series, starting with part 1 below

https://www.dailyo.in/politics/gandhi-hinduism-christianity-indian-freedom-struggle-non-violence-revolutionaries-indic-ethos/story/1/5049.html

 

Later, during partition, he even said something along the lines of "I am willing to die for the sins of my people." Gandhi seemed to have a Messiah complex. 

 

When that dumbo Godse shot him, he, in a way, gave him his wish and turned him into a martyr. 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Moochad said:

I'm almost afraid to ask, what exactly is hidden about Akbar?

PM'd you a link to another forum where I posted more on this, as I don't want to write that much on it.

 

Basically the Great Secular Muslim King Akbar, the one that IoI types promote to create an alternative history of some magical syncretic Mughal Empire, was actually an Apostate away from Islam during his whole "tolerant" phase. 

 

Some of his actions were, in fact, actively abrasive to the Muslims in his court/palace.   

[Moochad]

9 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

When that dumbo Godse shot him, he, in a way, gave him his wish and turned him into a martyr. 

Exactly. At that point in time, Gandhi was trying to split the Congress into two separate parties. Then he dies and we are left with effectively a 1 party democracy for near 20 years.

 

Imagine if Netaji or Sardar Patel running an election vs Nehru. I bet India would be on a very different trajectory. 

 

Thanks man for the reads, I think I may join that forum as well.  

[Singh bling]

4 hours ago, Moochad said:

Exactly. At that point in time, Gandhi was trying to split the Congress into two separate parties. Then he dies and we are left with effectively a 1 party democracy for near 20 years.

 

Imagine if Netaji or Sardar Patel running an election vs Nehru. I bet India would be on a very different trajectory. 

 

Thanks man for the reads, I think I may join that forum as well.  

Splitting Congress on what basis? A party require ideology.The fact is at that time Gandhi and Nehru were so popular that Indians were unable to look beyond them . Patel was old and did not live past 1950 . The dalit messiah of today Ambedkar did try to contest elections against congress , he badly lost. This is unthinkable from today's perspective as these days you can abuse Gandhi as much but if you dare to speak a single word against Ambedkar you will be in jail.

[Moochad]

9 hours ago, Singh bling said:

Splitting Congress on what basis? A party require ideology.The fact is at that time Gandhi and Nehru were so popular that Indians were unable to look beyond them . Patel was old and did not live past 1950 . The dalit messiah of today Ambedkar did try to contest elections against congress , he badly lost. This is unthinkable from today's perspective as these days you can abuse Gandhi as much but if you dare to speak a single word against Ambedkar you will be in jail.

A party may require an ideology, but the Congress of the independence era had none except only they wanted freedom from the British . There were all kinds of different ideology people in Congress. An example is the Bengal Congress where there were people in the Congress leadership who supported a United Bengal movement separate from India. 

https://bengalvoice.blogspot.com/2008/05/chapter-4-partitio-n-t-l-s-t-from-close.html

 

 

It is also a myth about this popularity of Nehru. Congress people themselves elected Patel in their Working Committee over Nehru. Gandhi was worried that Nehru would abandon the party, so he pressured Patel to withdraw his name and Nehru then got power. His popularity with the masses is a myth because he just attached his name to Gandhi's riding off of Gandhi's name to create an aura of his own popularity. The national elections after independence were hardly proove of Nehru's popularity because there was no other pan india party to compete with congress. 

[mishra]

I still can not understand who the hell among Muslims does not want to let Hindus build a temple where Hindus believe it supposed to be Ram Temple. How can Wakf board justify it to fellow Muslims brethrens. Why the hell Waqf board is not ready to find a path to peacefull settlement. After all, if anything, Islam isn't about idol worshipping.Why the hell that one little peace of land is so important to Waqf board.

 

Honestly, its beyond my understanding. BTW, I am not a particularly religious person and actually dont care much. The one and only reason I care about this whole issue is as a individual, I have my responsibility towards a community, which is still to grasp the concept of Darwianism or theory of everything.

 

And hence, I feel that Supreme Court Judge who threw the case out should have a look into mirror. After all India is a nation of Gandhi and Gandhi was firm believer in "Maryad Purushottam Ram". Anyone against it, including those smartass judges, Have some shame

[Global.Baba]

8 minutes ago, mishra said:

I still can not understand who the hell among Muslims does not want to let Hindus build a temple where Hindus believe it supposed to be Ram Temple. How can Wakf board justify it to fellow Muslims brethrens. Why the hell Waqf board is not ready to find a path to peacefull settlement. After all, if anything, Islam isn't about idol worshipping.Why the hell that one little peace of land is so important to Waqf board.

 

Honestly, its beyond my understanding. BTW, I am not a particularly religious person and actually dont care much. The one and only reason I care about this whole issue is as a individual, I have my responsibility towards a community, which is still to grasp the concept of Darwianism or theory of everything.

 

And hence, I feel that Supreme Court Judge who threw the case out should have a look into mirror. After all India is a nation of Gandhi and Gandhi was firm believer in "Maryad Purushottam Ram". Anyone against it, including those smartass judges, Have some shame

The common Muslims don’t give a fk. It is usually the Owaisi type and other politicians who kind of create nuisance and anarchy.

 

I had a Muslim taxi driver told me recently that he personally wishes this whole Temple conflict is resolved ASAP by just giving the land away to build the temple. Most common folk want to

move on.

 

Ram is one of the most important gods in Hindu religion. Infact Hindus believe that the was the original king of this entire land. Hindus claim that it is his birth place. Trust me if any Muslim would claim that if an important figure in their religion is born in a  land  where a temple was built, 90% of the Hindus would give it away in a heartbeat.

[Tibarn]

On 11/20/2018 at 11:31 PM, Singh bling said:

The fact is at that time Gandhi and Nehru were so popular that Indians were unable to look beyond them .

According to Gandhi himself his popularity was in decline around the partition era. This is true especially because many people viewed his cancellation of the nationwide satyagraha after the Chauri Chaura incident as a betrayal. 

 

For Bose fans, Bose even beat Gandhi's candidate, and thus by association Gandhi, in the Congress elections of 1939(?).

[coffee_rules]

SC Verdict on Ayodhya to be announced tomorrow.

 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/ayodhya-judgment-sc-to-pronounce-verdict-in-ram-janmbhoomi-babri-masjid-land-dispute-case-tomorrow/articleshow/71974673.cms

 

And hints are:

 

 

 

Jai Shiree Raam! Mandir Wahin Banega!!

 

And Lutyens Langots are already crying...

 

 

 

Edited November 8, 2019 by coffee_rules

[jf1gp_1]

Excellent. This will be over soon. One more election agenda gone.