Jump to content

Ayodhya Verdict


Global.Baba

Recommended Posts

The Muslims(The representatives obviously not the entire community)  should have given this for free as a sign of peace instead of negotiating for a bigger piece of land. There is a stigma on Muslims for dividing this country and this was a great chance for them to remove that for once and for all. No one would even dare to call Indian Muslims as Pakistani agents or traitors ever again. This was their golden chance. 

 

In the end it was like buying back your stolen property for double the price.

 

On the Positive side though, glad this never ending issue has finally come to a close and we all can move on. Hopefully fingers crossed. Kudos to the BJP government for ending this mess started by Bharat Ratna Rajiv Gandhi.

 

Jai Sriram

Edited by maniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Waste of time getting riled up over organized religious stuff. I could not care less if there is Mandir or a Masjid built or both co-exist. :yawn2:

 

Go solve the issues that plague modern India - extreme overpopulation, extreme poverty, lack of education, extreme wealth gap, poor infrastructure, polluted environment, jobs, warega, warega, warega ...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Audiophile said:

Waste of time getting riled up over organized religious stuff. I could not care less if there is Mandir or a Masjid built or both co-exist. :yawn2:

 

Go solve the issues that plague modern India - extreme overpopulation, extreme poverty, lack of education, extreme wealth gap, poor infrastructure, polluted environment, jobs, warega, warega, warega ...

 

Why does it have to be this OR that. Shouldn't we reclaim our civilization? Have our ancestors sacrificed their lives for no reason? This is a centuries old war with the enemy, we have lost half our country because of them, should we allow them to walk all over us? Muslims can never be in peace with kafirs, either put them in their place or die. We are fighting for our existence, for our rights. Need to learn from our history, else we will repeat mistakes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Image result for gyanvapi mosqueImage result for mathura temple mosque

Next job at hand, because of historical importance. Muslims must be made to see sense so that we can have peaceful swaps without going through the violence bit, if Muslims insist on violence make those people curse their ancestors for choosing India over Pakistan.

 

There are many other mosques constructed on demolished temple sites but in terms of importance troika of Ayodhya/Banaras/Mathura is something else. Likewise Buddhists should get their demolished monasteries back, Jains/Sikhs all must be compensated for losses incurred during the evil reign of desert cult. For too long Islamic zealots have gone unchecked, leave the Western societies be if they want to bring doom to their lands...karma for their colonial exploitation. 

 

 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Gollum said:

Ayodhya temple will be on jihadi hit list till the end of time. Muslims are not happy with their 5 acres mosque despite Babri masjid not having been used for prayers much before 1992. Muslims will never let us be in peace, no room for complacency....I think each and every important temple in India is now a target for Islamists, and they will strike just like they repeatedly do in Amarnath. 

 

This is wrong. The Babri Masjid was a place of worship from 1857 to 1949. In 1949, some murtis of Lord Ram were placed in the masjid and the government locked the place, but the priests were allowed to perform their daily pooja.

 

Today's verdict says that the Muslims started praying at the Babri masjid in 1857. I haven't read the entire verdict or the annexes, but I suspect this is a British ploy  to divide and rule after the Indian mutiny.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For any Muslim matters, the idea was always about "the change has to come from within". This verdict alongside the TT, challenges it and puts them in accordance with constitution. But there is a long road ahead and many outstanding issues remain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Next job at hand, because of historical importance. Muslims must be made to see sense so that we can have peaceful swaps without going through the violence bit, if Muslims insist on violence make those people curse their ancestors for choosing India over Pakistan.

There are many other mosques constructed on demolished temple sites but in terms of importance troika of Ayodhya/Banaras/Mathura is something else. Likewise Buddhists should get their demolished monasteries back, Jains/Sikhs all must be compensated for losses incurred during the evil reign of desert cult. For too long Islamic zealots have gone unchecked, leave the Western societies be if they want to bring doom to their lands...karma for their colonial exploitation. 

 

 

Muslims (of India) didn't insist on violence re: the Babri masjid dispute. Though unhappy with the locking of the Babri Masjid from 1949, they didn't do anything remotely close to what the karsevaks did in 1992.  The Wakf board approached the court, on both occasions.

What exactly are you talking about?  

 

 

Edited by Mariyam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gollum said:

Next job at hand, because of historical importance. Muslims must be made to see sense so that we can have peaceful swaps without going through the violence bit, if Muslims insist on violence make those people curse their ancestors for choosing India over Pakistan.

 

There are many other mosques constructed on demolished temple sites but in terms of importance troika of Ayodhya/Banaras/Mathura is something else. Likewise Buddhists should get their demolished monasteries back, Jains/Sikhs all must be compensated for losses incurred during the evil reign of desert cult. For too long Islamic zealots have gone unchecked, leave the Western societies be if they want to bring doom to their lands...karma for their colonial exploitation.

You have to understand these are converts, and thus they are huge insecurities about their past/history. And to overcome that, they have kattarpanthi Thus, the root is education and a correct picture of history can solve many issues.

 

In this very case, some imminent historians like Habib, Thapar particularly did misrepresentation of archaeological evidence. Thus, education and correct history is so important....

Edited by someone
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, maniac said:

The Muslims(The representatives obviously not the entire community)  should have given this for free as a sign of peace instead of negotiating for a bigger piece of land. There is a stigma on Muslims for dividing this country and this was a great chance for them to remove that for once and for all. No one would even dare to call Indian Muslims as Pakistani agents or traitors ever again. This was their golden chance. 

 

In the end it was like buying back your stolen property for double the price.

 

On the Positive side though, glad this never ending issue has finally come to a close and we all can move on. Hopefully fingers crossed. Kudos to the BJP government for ending this mess started by Bharat Ratna Rajiv Gandhi.

 

Jai Sriram

I agree with your first sentence. The Wakf board should have relinquished all claim on this land in 1949. Would have gone a long way in showing an intent to co-exist. The chance of relinquishing claim was not possible after the demolition, it would have been seen as a loss of face. Even the current chairman of the Wakf board wanted to relinquish the claim that the Allahabad HC gave the Sunni Wakf board in 2010. The rest of the board however, were not amenable to the idea.

 

But all in all, I'm happy that the SC court took a stand has declared based on their findings that there existed a non Islamic structure beneath the masjid. Leaves no doubt on the ownership. This title deed is settled. 

 

This is where our agreement ends.

It isn't the BJP goverment that has resolved the issue. It is the judiciary. Give credit where due.

And more over, there is no 'stigma' on present day Muslims of India for the partition. That is a figment of your imagination.

Edited by Mariyam
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

 

Muslims (of India) didn't insist on violence re: the Babri masjid dispute. The Wakf board approached the court.  

Why do you juxtapose foreign invaders from 300-800 years ago and Muslims of India today?

1946-47 wasn't 300-800 years ago or even for that matter Moplah riots. Kashmir the only Muslim majority region in India expelled its minorities, we have faced so many terror attacks perpetrated by Indian Muslims, apart from disproportionate representation in violent crime, underworld, anti-national activities etc. I have every reason to be suspicious like many others, at least to me Muslims need to do a lot more to correct their image, to earn confidence of the majority. Not an India specific problem either. 

 

Do you agree with this? Not entirely accurate (even the data), things are much worse. But an interesting take nonetheless, simple layman explanation.

Quote

How Islam progressively takes over countries

By Mark Ellis

In Dr. Peter Hammond’s book, “Slavery, Terrorism and Islam,” he documents the way Muslims slowly develop a presence in various countries and as their population numbers build, become more aggressive and assertive about exercising Sharia law.

“Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life,” Dr. Hammond notes in his book. “Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other components.”


Their takeover of a country, what Dr. Hammond refers to as “Islamization,” begins when the population of Muslims reaches a critical mass, and they being to agitate for various privileges.

Open, free, democratic societies are particularly vulnerable. “When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the other components tend to creep in as well,” he notes.

This is how it works, according to Dr. Hammond:

When the Muslim population remains under 2% in a country, they will be seen primarily as a peace-loving minority and not as a threat to other citizens. This is the current situation in:

United States — Muslim 0.6%

Australia — Muslim 1.5%

Canada — Muslim 1.9%

China — Muslim 1.8%

Italy — Muslim 1.5%

Norway — Muslim 1.8%

As the Muslim population reaches 2% to 5%, they begin to recruit from ethnic minorities and disaffected groups, within prisons and street gangs. This is happening in:

Denmark — Muslim 2%

Germany — Muslim 3.7%

United Kingdom — Muslim 2.7%

Spain — Muslim 4%

Thailand — Muslim 4.6%

“From 5% on, they exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population,” Dr. Hammond notes. “For example, they will push for the introduction of halal (clean by Islamic standards) food” and increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature such food on their shelves — along with threats for failure to comply. This is happening in:

France — Muslim 8%

Philippines — 5%

Sweden — Muslim 5%

Switzerland — Muslim 4.3%

The Netherlands — Muslim 5.5%

Trinidad & Tobago — Muslim 5.8%

Soon they begin to apply pressure to allow Sharia law within their own communities (sometimes ghettos).

“When Muslims approach 10% of the population, they tend to increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions,” Dr. Hammond notes. “In Paris, we are already seeing car-burnings. Any non-Muslim action offends Islam, and results in uprisings and threats, such as in Amsterdam, with opposition to Mohammed cartoons and films about Islam.” These tensions are seen on a regular basis in:

Guyana — Muslim 10%

India — Muslim 13.4%

Israel — Muslim 16%

Kenya — Muslim 10%

Russia — Muslim 15%

The violence increases when the Muslim population reaches 20%. “After reaching 20%, nations can expect hair-trigger rioting, jihad militia formations, sporadic killings, and the burnings of Christian churches and Jewish synagogues,” such as in:

Ethiopia — Muslim 32.8%

“At 40%, nations experience widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks, and ongoing militia warfare,” such as in:

Bosnia — Muslim 40%

Chad — Muslim 53.1%

Lebanon — Muslim 59.7%

From 60%, persecution of non-believing “infidels” rises significantly, including sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia law as a weapon, and Jizya, a tax placed on infidels, such as in:

Albania — Muslim 70%

Malaysia — Muslim 60.4%

Qatar — Muslim 77.5%

Sudan — Muslim 70%

After 80%, expect daily intimidation and violent jihad, some State-run ethnic cleansing, and even some genocide, as these nations drive out “infidels,” and move toward a 100% Muslim society, which has been experienced to some degree in:

Bangladesh — Muslim 83%

Egypt — Muslim 90%

Gaza — Muslim 98.7%

Indonesia — Muslim 86.1%

Iran — Muslim 98%

Iraq — Muslim 97%

Jordan — Muslim 92%

Morocco — Muslim 98.7%

Pakistan — Muslim 97%

Palestine — Muslim 99%

Syria — Muslim 90%

Tajikistan — Muslim 90%

Turkey — Muslim 99.8%

United Arab Emirates — Muslim 96%

A 100% Muslim society will theoretically usher in their version of peace — the peace of ‘Dar-es-Salaam’ — the Islamic House of Peace. “Here there’s supposed to be peace, because everybody is a Muslim, the Madrassas are the only schools, and the Koran is the only word,” such as in:

Afghanistan — Muslim 100%

Saudi Arabia — Muslim 100%

Somalia — Muslim 100%

Yemen — Muslim 100%

Dr. Hammond observes this Islamic ideal is seldom realized. “Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.”

“It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos, within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia law,” he states.

Dr. Hammond is also concerned by demographic trends. “Today’s 1.5 billion Muslims make up 22% of the world’s population,” he observes. “But their birth rates dwarf the birth rates of Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, and all other believers. Muslims will exceed 50% of the world’s population by the end of this century.”

Unfortunately, peace is never achieved, as in these 100% states the most radical Muslims intimidate and spew hatred, and satisfy their blood lust by killing less radical Muslims, for a variety of reasons.

‘Before I was nine I had learned the basic canon of Arab life. It was me against my brother; me and my brother against our father; my family against my cousins and the clan; the clan against the tribe; the tribe against the world, and all of us against the infidel.’ —
Leon Uris, ‘The Haj’

It is important to understand that in some countries, with well under 100% Muslim populations, such as France, the minority Muslim populations live in ghettos,within which they are 100% Muslim, and within which they live by Sharia Law. The national police do not even enter these ghettos. There are no national courts nor schools nor non-Muslim religious facilities. In such situations, Muslims do not integrate into the community at large.

The children attend madrasses. They learn only the Koran. To even associate with an infidel is a crime punishable with death. Therefore, in some areas of certain nations, Muslim Imams and extremists exercise more power than the national average would indicate.


from Dr. Peter Hammond’s book:
‘Slavery, Terrorism and Islam:
The Historical Roots and Contemporary Threat’

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

It isn't the BJP goverment that has resolved the issue. It is the judiciary. Give credit where due.

And more over, there is no 'stigma' on present day Muslims of India for the partition. That is a figment of your imagination.

It is only BJP and possible Shiv Sena which were totally committed to resolving this Ram Mandir issue. For Congress, DMK, even Lord Ram existence was questioned. And it was only under a BJP government, where the judiciary took this matter to a conclusion, else, it was always tarik pe tarik.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Gollum 

I was talking in context of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute.

 

There is a distinction between the invaders who demolished the existing structure and build the Babri masjid, and the Muslims who reside in the vicinity today.

Arguably, a historic wrong has been corrected today. Why still the bitterness towards present people who have naught to do with it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, someone said:

It is only BJP and possible Shiv Sena which were totally committed to resolving this Ram Mandir issue. For Congress, DMK, even Lord Ram existence was questioned. And it was only under a BJP government, where the judiciary took this matter to a conclusion, else, it was always tarik pe tarik.

Is that an euphemism for sent karsevaks to break down the masjid?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...