What's new

Babri Masjid case- Indian Supreme Court unanimously strikes down Muslim's petition

Sorry but my God is not born or blue in color or flirts with girls and steals their clothes when they are bathing in a river. That may be your God.
haha maybe not my god, the point is you have faith. Another person has faith in something else, he may believe god is born in Ayodhya, some believe God is sitting in the moon, others believe he is in Sky, and do you know god personally to know he doesn't do any of that stuff or you know where he is? Ditto Faith.
 
haha maybe not my god, the point is you have faith. Another person has faith in something else, he may believe god is born in Ayodhya, some believe God is sitting in the moon, others believe he is in Sky, and do you know god personally to know he doesn't do any of that stuff or you know where he is? Ditto Faith.

Aaah...then that is exactly what it is - faith. Don't try and "prove" anything in matters of faith.
 
Except for physical structures like "Temples" that may have been constructed in n' th century.
It does not matter if a temple existed in antiquity.

If you dig up deep enough, you will find fossils. Does not mean you give your land back to animals.

The Babri masjid stood there. It was brought down. It must be built again on the same spot.

Sorry but my God is not born or blue in color or flirts with girls and steals their clothes when they are bathing in a river. That may be your God.
Good one.

I do, but you have to delve a little more. What happened there was frightening; old ghosts and phantoms were invoked and the situation was far more complex than it seems.

WHAT FOLLOWS IS NOT A JUSTIFICATION; IT SEEKS TO EXPLAIN THE HORROR. PERHAPS THROUGH EXPLAINING IT, BY FIRST UNDERSTANDING IT, WE MAY PREVENT ANY RECURRENCE, BEYOND ANY PREVENTION TO BE ACHIEVED BY STRONG ENFORCEMENT OF LAW AND ORDER ALONE.

First, there was no pastor. Graham Staines refrained from preaching, and confined himself only to medical service.

Second, he and his children were attacked by a tribe, a group, a sect that was peculiar. The missionary work (of others) had affected the tribals, and they had shown their acceptance of the preaching. The group that reacted, the Konds, were the remnants of those that provided military service to the small rajas and the Pathan nawabs of the region. They were sent away once the British took over the administration, and were suppressed when they broke out in military resistance.

Third, the main instigator, Dara Singh, was from Bihar, but he obviously knew the ethnography of the area like the back of his own hand. He knew enough to tap into the resentment over the killing of a Hindu sectarian leader immediately before, by Naxalites, who had nothing to do with Christian preaching, or with Christian medical missions, to tap into the resentment of the non-tribal at the new attitude of converted tribals, and to tap into the bitter memories of the Konds at their suppression by the white man.

This is my reconstruction. You are encouraged to dig further.

He combined these toxic elements, the conversions, the killing of the Hindu leader, and the pent-up hatred of white people, into that act of horror.

Please try to understand why I am telling you all this. The Christians in Odisha are not dead. Far from it. The missionaries continue to preach, and they continue to convert. The Sangh Parivar continues to oppose them. In those borderline places between tribal and settled farmer, the tension continues, and will continue, and, just to complicate matters, the ultra-left, the Naxalites have a role to play. Mainly against the Konds, or rather, the leadership of the Konds, to detach the followers from the old leadership and convert them into leftist guerrillas.

That act of savagery should be flung into the face of the Sanghis, but nobody will do that. The Sanghi depends on the frailty of human memory, and depends on the prudence of an individual human being when faced by a mob, as is the case on PDF, to brush this and others like these under the carpet.
Hindutva is sunk into the minds of the tribes too... :(

Christian conversions have not made as much an impact in Odisha unfortunately as in AP/telengana. Not a big fan of conversions per se (unless they come with devotion) but Christians would not have done something this heinous. This is something that only 'THE community' is capable of.
 
Christian conversions have not made as much an impact in Odisha unfortunately as in AP/telengana. Not a big fan of conversions per se (unless they come with devotion) but Christians would not have done something this heinous. This is something that only 'THE community' is capable of.

Read a statement something to the effect....if you are going to convert for a bag of rice, then maybe your faith was not worth keeping anyway.
 
What did he gain by selling someone out? He was shunned for saying the truth by people around him. He still lives in a Normal House not in a bungalow for "selling" someone out.
He is a sellout to Muslims. He flaunts his Muslim name and lends credibility to Sanghi claims.

Read a statement something to the effect....if you are going to convert for a bag of rice, then maybe your faith was not worth keeping anyway.
Precisely my point.

Those who have faith otoh commit crimes against humanity. You can guess whom I (or any other with a conscience) will support.
 
It does not matter if a temple existed in antiquity.

If you dig up deep enough, you will find fossils. Does not mean you give your land back to animals.

The Babri masjid stood there. It was brought down. It must be built again on the same spot.


Good one.


Hindutva is sunk into the minds of the tribes too... :(

Christian conversions have not made as much an impact in Odisha unfortunately as in AP/telengana. Not a big fan of conversions per se (unless they come with devotion) but Christians would not have done something this heinous. This is something that only 'THE community' is capable of.

No, no, I put it very badly, if that is the conclusion you came to.

The tribals were fine; the people who used Hindutva were the Konds, who were not a tribe.

No comment about the rest.
 
He is a sellout to Muslims. He flaunts his Muslim name and lends credibility to Sanghi claims.


Precisely my point.

Those who have faith otoh commit crimes against humanity. You can guess whom I (or any other with a conscience) will support.
Just because you don't like what he says, doesn't mean he's a sellout. Besides, the Supreme Court kinda agreed with it and hence the verdict. I don't see much of an ulterior motive in it.

It does not matter if a temple existed in antiquity.

If you dig up deep enough, you will find fossils. Does not mean you give your land back to animals.

The Babri masjid stood there. It was brought down. It must be built again on the same spot.
That's the whole point of dispute, the land is a property that's claimed by two groups. One had better arguments and claims and won the case. It's that simple.
 
haha maybe not my god, the point is you have faith. Another person has faith in something else, he may believe god is born in Ayodhya, some believe God is sitting in the moon, others believe he is in Sky, and do you know god personally to know he doesn't do any of that stuff or you know where he is? Ditto Faith.

all indians knew there was ram mandir where babri masjid was constructed by mir baqi after demolishing the mandir.
hindus got that site for which they were fighting from last 500 years , justice delivered after 500 years . right thinking indian muslims support and contribute for construction of ram mandir at that site .muslims from my village are all contributing for ram mandir in ayodhya .
 
Last edited:
Sorry but my God is not born or blue in color or flirts with girls and steals their clothes when they are bathing in a river. That may be your God.
I am sure you are well aware that it's precisely because of this narrow mindset of the Muslims that they are having problems living in so many countries. Carry on though. Very similar to the evil Brahmin mindset that you guys go on harping about.
 
That's the whole point of dispute, the land is a property that's claimed by two groups. One had better arguments and claims and won the case. It's that simple.

Not that simple. Every legal expert that is *not* a Sanghi has decried the hollowness of the judgement. Basically, the Supreme Court could not find a legal basis under the title of property or the place of birth of Ram to award the land to the Hindus. It used the adverse possession clause to deny Muslims their rights over the property.

So this is modus operandi that will be followed in the times to come:

1. Deny Muslims the ability to worship in their mosques.
2. Claim that the mosque is now abandoned.
3. Award the property to any other party under the adverse possession clause.

This is what is being done in Benaras as we speak.
 
Just because you don't like what he says, doesn't mean he's a sellout. Besides, the Supreme Court kinda agreed with it and hence the verdict. I don't see much of an ulterior motive in it.


That's the whole point of dispute, the land is a property that's claimed by two groups. One had better arguments and claims and won the case. It's that simple.
A masjid once built can not be undone by arguments.

Come on!
 

Back
Top Bottom