Babri Verdict to be announced today

[Manny_Pacquiao]

It is not all muslims. Some are happy with the verdict. Either way they will have to abide by SC verdict' date=' so will Hindus. But it is an important step forward and required great judicial courage.[/quote'] u know what the reality of the situation is? nobody cares. muslim, hindu, whatever, none of them care about something that was nothing more than a publicity stunt by a political party. i am sure the majority just want to get on with their lives and dont give a damn what the verdict is. thats how ppl should react in a civilised society. let the fundoos have their fun, the normal ppl can keep doing what they do every day

[ravishingravi]

FYI' date=' [b']Javed Akhat didn't support the verdict, he asked many doubts on the verdict. How can you say that this judgement can be used as a step forward when milsim religious leaders are already playing victim card. Whey their sheriath says no land can be given to kaffirs? Where is the goodwill gesture from muslim leaders to accept the verdict and build a temple and mosque side by side in the disputed place?

He asked doubts and they were clarified. In fact, he criticized the muslim hardliner, who was talking about "battle" and "war" , when the right wing have conceded their position a way by being pleased with 1/3rd area and not the entire piece of land. I think it is an initial reaction. Things will die down. The matter is status quo as of now and will be appealed to SC. However what judiciary decision has done in a reconcilliation process, is that it provides a framework. Now, till the SC verdict which could take years, this HC verdict will be the base from which they can build on. As for Sheraith, it is more complicate since the question is whether it was a legal mosque or not and whether there is any instance in sheriath of giving away land as a gesture of generosity. I am not reacting too much to the initial reactions. Even the hindu hardliners have filed an appeal. It will take time for people to accept the judgement and this eventuality of division.

[King Tendulkar]

The key to this verdict is no one is particularly happy with it. All parties disagree to some extent. But the beauty is no one is FURIOUS and full of VENGEANCE cos of it. No one has totally won but no one has totally lost. It will not cause riots. It will be appealed and appeal will be dissmissed and the panchayat verdict will maintain.

[King Tendulkar]

Ravi' date=' None of these eminent Muslim persona - Bukhari, Owaisi, Jilani, Shahbuddin, MJ have expresses any happiness about the decision. The closest was MJ grudgingly saying we should accept the decision and move on to concentrate our energies on development. I dont know how you can say some where Happy.[/quote'] Agree no muslim expressed any happiness. Only secular Hindus expressed happiness. Says a lot about the mind set of islamisists. Also how annoying is that **** Burkha. She is desperate to condemn those who demolished the mosque, keeps saying how disgusting it was, and how law and order must be maintained and perpertators arrested and jailed. But when it comes to Kashmir hooligans throwing stones and burning buildings and attacking police, she never says law and order must be mainted and how disgusting their actions are and how perpetrators need to be arrested etc Instead says need to reach ot to them and their is a disconnect with them blah blah. Why does she not say that hindus need to be reached out to as well.

[urbestfriend]

Agree no muslim expressed any happiness. Only secular Hindus expressed happiness. Says a lot about the mind set of islamisists. Also how annoying is that **** Burkha. She is desperate to condemn those who demolished the mosque, keeps saying how disgusting it was, and how law and order must be maintained and perpertators arrested and jailed. But when it comes to Kashmir hooligans throwing stones and burning buildings and attacking police, she never says law and order must be mainted and how disgusting their actions are and how perpetrators need to be arrested etc Instead says need to reach ot to them and their is a disconnect with them blah blah. Why does she not say that hindus need to be reached out to as well.

Burkha is the most biased Indian journalist ever. She can discuss about so called "Hindu terrorists" organizations(sanaathan sanstha/sadhvi pragya) forever ( at least I have seen 10 debates), but when it comes to Islamic terrorists, suddenly terrorism has no religion. That b**** can only blabber about Kasmiri Azadi, human right violation in Kashmir/Gujarath fully ignoring the provocations and Hindu terrorists.

[seedhi]

The verdict is somewhat in favor of Hindus. The Muslims are obviously not entirely happy. But the interesting fact is that the ones who are most severly criticizing the verdict are not the Muslims (in general) but the SELF STYLED (PSEUDO-) SECULARISTS like Mukul Kesavan, Rajinder Sachar, Siddharth Varadarajan, Shabnam Hashmi, Yogendra Yadav etc. They are willfully conflating the 1992 demolition of the structure with the dispute over title. Obviously they have little legal grasp of the exact nature of the dispute, and therefore sound even more aggrieved than the Muslim litigants in the case. These self serving BASTARDS will leave no stone unturned to ensure that the Muslim litigants reject any reconciliation and approach the SC for a review.

[urbestfriend]

The verdict is somewhat in favor of Hindus. The Muslims are obviously not entirely happy. But the interesting fact is that the ones who are most severly criticizing the verdict are not the Muslims (in general) but the SELF STYLED (PSEUDO-) SECULARISTS like Mukul Kesavan, Rajinder Sachar, Siddharth Varadarajan, Shabnam Hashmi, Yogendra Yadav etc. They are willfully conflating the 1992 demolition of the structure with the dispute over title. Obviously they have little legal grasp of the exact nature of the dispute, and therefore sound even more aggrieved than the Muslim litigants in the case. These self serving BASTARDS will leave no stone unturned to ensure that the Muslim litigants reject any reconciliation and approach the SC for a review.

This

[bihutoli]

Guess all groups knew that this was just an interim step in the way of a final resolution (read Supreme Court hearing) hence all these posturing. Notice the way all groups have representatives appealing against this verdict. I guess this is why the court gave such a middle of the road verdict. Just to avoid violence. The Supreme court verdict could be very different to this one.

[someone]

Guess all groups knew that this was just an interim step in the way of a final resolution (read Supreme Court hearing) hence all these posturing. Notice the way all groups have representatives appealing against this verdict. I guess this is why the court gave such a middle of the road verdict. Just to avoid violence. The Supreme court verdict could be very different to this one.

Then why were these Muslims before the verdict, saying that they will accept the decision and move on.

[King Tendulkar]

Guess all groups knew that this was just an interim step in the way of a final resolution (read Supreme Court hearing) hence all these posturing. Notice the way all groups have representatives appealing against this verdict. I guess this is why the court gave such a middle of the road verdict. Just to avoid violence. The Supreme court verdict could be very different to this one.

No chance. They will uphold this politically derived verdict and THAT WIL BE THAT

[bihutoli]

Then why were these Muslims before the verdict' date=' saying that they will accept the decision and move on.[/quote'] Don't know. They've the right to appeal though as far as I am concerned. They've said they'll accept the supreme court verdict. Though can't say if they'll stand by their word.

[ravishingravi]

No chance. They will uphold this politically derived verdict and THAT WIL BE THAT

Politically derived or not, there is no other solutiion. "Justice S U Khan Here is a small piece of land (1,500 square yards) where angels fear to tread. It is full of innumerable landmines. We are required to clear it.†This is how Justice Sibghat Ullah Khan described the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute likening it to a 1,500-sq yard minefield which he and his brother judges had to clear. “Some very sane elements advised us not to attempt that. We do not propose to rush in like fools lest we are blown. However, we have to take risk. It is said that the greatest risk in life is not daring to take risk when the occasion for the same arises,†he wrote in a prelude to his judgement. The judgement that ran into 285 pages says that judges cannot decide whether they had succeeded or failed in their attempts. “Once angels were made to bow before man. Sometimes he has to justify the said honour. This is one of those occasions. We have succeeded or failed? No one can be a judge in his own cause,†he said. The Prelude concludes with: “... herein follows the judgement for which the entire country is waiting with bated breath.†Delivering the judgement, Justice Khan said, “All the three sets of parties, ie. Muslims, Hindus and Nirmohi Akhara are declared joint title holders of the property/premises in dispute as described by letters A B C D E F in the map Plan-I prepared by Shri Shiv Shankar Lal, Pleader/Commissioner appointed by court in Suit No. 1 to the extent of 1/3rd share each for using and managing the same for worshipping. A preliminary decree to this effect is passed.†Justice Khan said even though all the three parties are declared to have one-third share each, “however, if while allotting exact portions, some minor adjustments in the share is to be made, then the same will be made and the adversely-affected party may be compensated by some portion of the adjoining land which has been acquired by the central government.â€" http://www.mumbaimirror.com/article/2/20101001201010010255246939a1d96fa/Divided-by-three.html

[bihutoli]

No chance. They will uphold this politically derived verdict and THAT WIL BE THAT

Doubt that. A supreme court verdict would imo be much more in line with the application of the law of the land. They'll avoid making rulings based on interpretation of matters of the faith etc. The main issue that would be considered is the ownership of the land. Don't know how that will pan out, but I suspect the muslims would be the more confident group.

[ravishingravi]

Doubt that. A supreme court verdict would imo be much more in line with the application of the law of the land. They'll avoid making rulings based on interpretation of matters of the faith etc. The main issue that would be considered is the ownership of the land. Don't know how that will pan out' date= but I suspect the muslims would be the more confident group.

No chance. Both parties don't have a strong title to the land.

[someone]

Don't know. They've the right to appeal though as far as I am concerned. They've said they'll accept the supreme court verdict. Though can't say if they'll stand by their word.

There is absolutely no reason that they will stop and accept the verdict till exactly 100% of the land will be given to them. Till then,the whole world is against them and it is complete injustice for them. This also has the making of becoming another Kashmir like issue in future, you will see Pakistan asking India to give the land to the Muslims or at least give the right for Muslims to decide if they are willing to give a part of India to Hindus. There will debates lead by Pakistan about this issue in United Nations........ and sadly if when Ayodha India becomes a muslim majority, this issue will disappear.

[bihutoli]

There is absolutely no reason that they will stop and accept the verdict till exactly 100% of the land will be given to them. Till then,the whole world is against them and it is complete injustice for them. This also has the making of becoming another Kashmir like issue in future, you will see Pakistan asking India to give the land to the Muslims or at least give the right for Muslims to decide if they are willing to give a part of India to Hindus. There will debates lead by Pakistan about this issue in United Nations........ and sadly if when Ayodha India becomes a muslim majority, this issue will disappear.

Thats wild speculation.

[Guest Gunner]

Thats wild speculation.

You are so wrong.

[urbestfriend]

http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2010/10/01/high-court-verdict-or-panchayat-pronouncement/#comment-128709 Clearly pseudo secularists are outraged with this verdict than anyone else :haha:

[bihutoli]

To reduce this dispute to a simplistic "Ownership of a piece of land" would be to completely miss the point. The entire point of this dispute was to resolve the question of whether the spot was birth place of Ram. The court has answered that without leaving anything to anybodies imagination.

This is simplistic. The legislature or the judiciary cannot conflate matters of the faith with implementation of the rights to property in the country. If they do that this sets a precedent and will lead to Ayodhya like situations elsewhere in the country (Mathura, Benaras etc). I think the SC would be extra cautious to avoid that.

[bihutoli]

History isnt on your side.

Why? Pakistan or the UN has no jurisdiction over internal matters of India. And we're still in the majority in this country after centuries of Mughal rule, aren't we?