What's new

Anniversary | 06 Dec 1992 | When India demolished, its 465 year old Mosque.

It is our country, and an internal matter.

How many temples have u guys demolished? :sniper:

Sick of being a secular country :hitwall:
 
.
A true Indian would have more hatred towards britishers than an Indian citizen of a diff religion.
It Was Reply Too your Questions As For True Indian Comment One Should not Need Some One Certificate that he is Patriot or Not It Automatically Judged When Time Actualy Arises
 
.
they gave us railways....gave us telecom. and last but not the least gave us a united guv....bcoz of all that...we r a big economy today...
The British rule was (despite some positive aspects,)a great misfortune for millions of Indians. And the way Winson Churchill spoke about Gandhi rankles, till today.
The British in India were generally the most detestable creatures one could find on earth. There were a some good people but overall, the British were looted India and murdered at least 30 million Indians.
Just after the battle of plassey British had seized from the Bengal King, a monstrous booty of Pound Sterling 20 million....in today’s terms it is worth $500 million.Thats just one of the wars I am talking about.If you calculate and charge Britain for what it looted from India...it will take them centuries to pay back.
Compare all this to what the Mughals had done for India.
And then comes our issue was Babri masjid demolition needed????
Yes...the political parties needed it.....not the common man.Babri masjid demolition hurt the sentiments of thousands of muslims in India.And so also every hindu was agitated by the fact that a mosque was built over the Ramjanam bhoomi.This was enough to cause the communal discord in the country.This worked in favor of both congress and BJP.
BJP got more hindu votes and muslims voted for the more "secular"looking congress.This loyalty of voters have done both the parties good in sooo many elections.
 
.
The British rule was (despite some positive aspects,)a great misfortune for millions of Indians. And the way Winson Churchill spoke about Gandhi rankles, till today.
The British in India were generally the most detestable creatures one could find on earth. There were a some good people but overall, the British were looted India and murdered at least 30 million Indians.
Just after the battle of plassey British had seized from the Bengal King, a monstrous booty of Pound Sterling 20 million....in today’s terms it is worth $500 million.Thats just one of the wars I am talking about.If you calculate and charge Britain for what it looted from India...it will take them centuries to pay back.
Compare all this to what the Mughals had done for India.
And then comes our issue was Babri masjid demolition needed????
Yes...the political parties needed it.....not the common man.Babri masjid demolition hurt the sentiments of thousands of muslims in India.And so also every hindu was agitated by the fact that a mosque was built over the Ramjanam bhoomi.This was enough to cause the communal discord in the country.This worked in favor of both congress and BJP.
BJP got more hindu votes and muslims voted for the more "secular"looking congress.This loyalty of voters have done both the parties good in sooo many elections.

ma'am.....what the british took away is nothing compared to wat congress is taking away ryt now...which is worth billions.....indian railways...which is one of the most successful organisation in the world today..which is the main reason of our economic boom and connects the whole nation...was given by the british......the reason m calling a keralite or a tamilian or a begali a fellow citizen...was given by the british....foundation of our defence forces...was led by the british....silly traditions like sati...was abolished by the british.....highlighting the problems of backward caste...was done by the british.....u shld read about aurangzeb/humayun if u realy wanna know what they did to the natives(hindus) of this land....and about babri...it had to happen
 
.
ma'am.....what the british took away is nothing compared to wat congress is taking away ryt now...which is worth billions.....indian railways...which is one of the most successful organisation in the world today..which is the main reason of our economic boom and connects the whole nation...was given by the british......the reason m calling a keralite or a tamilian or a begali a fellow citizen...was given by the british....foundation of our defence forces...was led by the british....silly traditions like sati...was abolished by the british.....highlighting the problems of backward caste...was done by the british.....u shld read about aurangzeb/humayun if u realy wanna know what they did to the natives(hindus) of this land....and about babri...it had to happen
I hold no sympathies towards congress.So spare me the spade.

But dont point towards a few muslim ruler and draw a blanket conclusion. How can you forget Akbar and Shah jahan.
Though not a Mughal but Tipu Sultan was also a muslim.But Tipu had many hindus in his ministry like the other Mughals.His army had successfully employed the iron cased cylinder rockets,that sent chills down the spine of Britishers.Had britishers not looted and plundered India....then to this date India would have had communal harmony.They divided India,they had sown the seed of communal violence before leaving India.
And did you by any chance forget Netaji Subhash Chandra bose's contribution in the formation of INA????
British made railways....for their own good.It facilitated the movement of their men/army easily across the length and breadth of India.

And about sati.....brace up for the surprises.:devil:
Mughal emperor Humayun was the first to try a royal fiat against sati.
Akbar was next to issue official general orders prohibiting sati and insisted that no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Chief police officers.The Chief police officers were instructed by him to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible.Pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help were offered to the potential sati to persuade her from committing the act.
Tavernier writing in the reign of Shah Jahan,observed that widows with children were not allowed in any circumstances to burn and that in other cases, governors did not readily give permission, but could be bribed to do so.
And here comes the biggest surprise for you........
The emperor Aurangzeb was the strongest opponent of sati among the Mughals. In December 1663 he issued an "order that in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".
 
.
I hold no sympathies towards congress.So spare me the spade.

But dont point towards a few muslim ruler and draw a blanket conclusion. How can you forget Akbar and Shah jahan.
Though not a Mughal but Tipu Sultan was also a muslim.But Tipu had many hindus in his ministry like the other Mughals.His army had successfully employed the iron cased cylinder rockets,that sent chills down the spine of Britishers.Had britishers not looted and plundered India....then to this date India would have had communal harmony.They divided India,they had sown the seed of communal violence before leaving India.
And did you by any chance forget Netaji Subhash Chandra bose's contribution in the formation of INA????
British made railways....for their own good.It facilitated the movement of their men/army easily across the length and breadth of India.

And about sati.....brace up for the surprises.:devil:
Mughal emperor Humayun was the first to try a royal fiat against sati.
Akbar was next to issue official general orders prohibiting sati and insisted that no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Chief police officers.The Chief police officers were instructed by him to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible.Pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help were offered to the potential sati to persuade her from committing the act.
Tavernier writing in the reign of Shah Jahan,observed that widows with children were not allowed in any circumstances to burn and that in other cases, governors did not readily give permission, but could be bribed to do so.
And here comes the biggest surprise for you........
The emperor Aurangzeb was the strongest opponent of sati among the Mughals. In December 1663 he issued an "order that in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".

accept akbar...all your fav. muslim rulers are in this list...including ur all time fav. shah jahan and u cutie pie tipu sultan...take a look

Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
.
I hold no sympathies towards congress.So spare me the spade.

But dont point towards a few muslim ruler and draw a blanket conclusion. How can you forget Akbar and Shah jahan.
Though not a Mughal but Tipu Sultan was also a muslim.But Tipu had many hindus in his ministry like the other Mughals.His army had successfully employed the iron cased cylinder rockets,that sent chills down the spine of Britishers.Had britishers not looted and plundered India....then to this date India would have had communal harmony.They divided India,they had sown the seed of communal violence before leaving India.
And did you by any chance forget Netaji Subhash Chandra bose's contribution in the formation of INA????
British made railways....for their own good.It facilitated the movement of their men/army easily across the length and breadth of India.

And about sati.....brace up for the surprises.:devil:
Mughal emperor Humayun was the first to try a royal fiat against sati.
Akbar was next to issue official general orders prohibiting sati and insisted that no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Chief police officers.The Chief police officers were instructed by him to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible.Pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help were offered to the potential sati to persuade her from committing the act.
Tavernier writing in the reign of Shah Jahan,observed that widows with children were not allowed in any circumstances to burn and that in other cases, governors did not readily give permission, but could be bribed to do so.
And here comes the biggest surprise for you........
The emperor Aurangzeb was the strongest opponent of sati among the Mughals. In December 1663 he issued an "order that in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".

Tipu ?? he destroyed hundreds of temples and killed thousands of Hindus in kerala ,We keralaites consider him as an invader
 
.
When I need your monkey brain opinions, I'll rattle your cage. Then I might consider them if you write them out in complete sentences.
Well its not me who went stupid all over the thread boy, so this is how it goes. If your sorry *** is too sensitive to take someone else criticism. Then kindly keep your stupidity to your self. I will tell u what I told that indian, mind your own house boy. As I was discussing a point with an indian. Which didnt concern you. And also what and how I follow my religion is non of your damn business. But unfortunately your liberal retards, like to bark all day long, forcing your shit down others throats. But when confronted then u have a problem. Now if u wan to carry on barking, kindly do so. I wouldnt bother my self with replying to your brain farts.
 
.
Well its not me who went stupid all over the thread boy, so this is how it goes. If your sorry *** is too sensitive to take someone else criticism. Then kindly keep your stupidity to your self. I will tell u what I told that indian, mind your own house boy. As I was discussing a point with an indian. Which didnt concern you. And also what and how I follow my religion is non of your damn business. But unfortunately your liberal retards, like to bark all day long, forcing your shit down others throats. But when confronted then u have a problem. Now if u wan to carry on barking, kindly do so. I wouldnt bother my self with replying to your brain farts.

We're in the same house, and that's why it is damn business to keep shitheads like you in check. And what I try to keep in check is not how you follow your religion, but how you portray it to outsiders. Now, let me remind what you'd said:

Aslan said:
I didnt bother to read ur rant beyond the first 2 lines, when u are having ur periods stay away from the keyboard.

Which is neither criticism nor a confrontation. I'd welcome either because it suggests that you're open to discussion. You plugged your ears running in circles screaming 'la la la i cant hear u... u stupid' - my 8 year old nephew often does the same.

Aslan said:
But unfortunately your liberal retards, like to bark all day long, forcing your shit down others throats.

Yep, clearly, it's us liberals forcing shit down people's throats, ainnit?!
 
.
The British rule was (despite some positive aspects,)a great misfortune for millions of Indians. And the way Winson Churchill spoke about Gandhi rankles, till today.
The British in India were generally the most detestable creatures one could find on earth. There were a some good people but overall, the British were looted India and murdered at least 30 million Indians.
Just after the battle of plassey British had seized from the Bengal King, a monstrous booty of Pound Sterling 20 million....in today’s terms it is worth $500 million.Thats just one of the wars I am talking about.If you calculate and charge Britain for what it looted from India...it will take them centuries to pay back.
Compare all this to what the Mughals had done for India.
And then comes our issue was Babri masjid demolition needed????
Yes...the political parties needed it.....not the common man.Babri masjid demolition hurt the sentiments of thousands of muslims in India.And so also every hindu was agitated by the fact that a mosque was built over the Ramjanam bhoomi.This was enough to cause the communal discord in the country.This worked in favor of both congress and BJP.
BJP got more hindu votes and muslims voted for the more "secular"looking congress.This loyalty of voters have done both the parties good in sooo many elections.
The British rule was (despite some positive aspects,)a great misfortune for millions of Indians. And the way Winson Churchill spoke about Gandhi rankles, till today.
The British in India were generally the most detestable creatures one could find on earth. There were a some good people but overall, the British were looted India and murdered at least 30 million Indians.
Just after the battle of plassey British had seized from the Bengal King, a monstrous booty of Pound Sterling 20 million....in today’s terms it is worth $500 million.Thats just one of the wars I am talking about.If you calculate and charge Britain for what it looted from India...it will take them centuries to pay back.
Compare all this to what the Mughals had done for India.
And then comes our issue was Babri masjid demolition needed????
Yes...the political parties needed it.....not the common man.Babri masjid demolition hurt the sentiments of thousands of muslims in India.And so also every hindu was agitated by the fact that a mosque was built over the Ramjanam bhoomi.This was enough to cause the communal discord in the country.This worked in favor of both congress and BJP.
BJP got more hindu votes and muslims voted for the more "secular"looking congress.This loyalty of voters have done both the parties good in sooo many elections.

Dear watevr you are tryin to say is also very fine.....
But I think such situation cud have been avoided......... If our muslim brthrs understood the hindus sentiments attached to such places & both community woud have done some give n take compromise then it would not have happened..... I also feel one thing that if some how Muslim would have agreed to shift that same masjid then it would have created a histroy by itself n setting a true example of brthud n careness no one would have asked for more from muslims brthrs unfortunately both the community made that issue of their religiois ego..... Sametime we all know all ayodyha was all about birth place of Raam befoer Mughal era...... Just go all over north's hindu famous religious places like vrandavan to kashi you wud find a masjid over hindu temples.... Muslim also know how these Masjid came up across nothern regions but they refused to acknowledge the same........ I am also not supporting that act of demolishing but expect our muslim brths to look at such issue holistically not religiously or egoistically and hindus are at fault at many places too.... no denying that .......
Some time people do talk abt hindu extermeism can anybody hint how hindus are turning fundamentalist ..century old prejudice against muslim opression... divide n rule policy... appeasement policy... series of terrorist attack still n lack of will power among muslim to condem harshly, protest n show deep anger against such bastards in their own commnity....
You might not remember but I tell you, Muslim people came to protest once in Mumbai against the Assam riots I think last year , what happend later was shameful for me as an Indian but I never ever seen such anger when a muslim terrorist is caught or when its know that thier community people are behind such attacks.. ......... I am also not saying all muslim are on same page sametime i am also not supporting any act of voilence by any of these communities...... I was never Pro hindu but seeing chain of events all across I became bit pro but surely I nvr liked any bloodshed for my religion or feelings against any other religion .......... but if we stuck between mandir/masjid then there is no way ahead.........At last for me god lives in my heart not in temples.......
 
.
accept akbar...all your fav. muslim rulers are in this list...including ur all time fav. shah jahan and u cutie pie tipu sultan...take a look

accept akbar
The final Siege of Chittorgarh came 33 years later, in 1567, when the Mughal Emperor Akbar invaded the fort. Akbar wanted to conquer Mewar, which was being ably ruled by Rana Uday Singh II, a fine prince of Mewar.
The fortress of Chittor finally fell on February 1568 after a siege of four months when it stormed by the Mughal forces. Akbar himself ordered 2 "armored Elephants" and 250 Sowarsto enter through two narrow breaches on the northern wall of the fort .Instead of surrendering to the Mughals the Rajputs chose to worship the sun one last time and fight to the death. This was common practise among the Rajputs also known as saka , Akbar then ordered the victorious Mughal forces to massacre the inhabitants of Chittorgarh Fort.


Akbar then ordered the heads of his enemies to be displayed upon towers erected throughout the region, in order to demonstrate his authority.

Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Great Peace of source Brother My Questions To All So called "Secular s" Please show If any Hindu Kings try too Massacre Other Communities.we Hindus never put an eye on others Land.
 
.
I hold no sympathies towards congress.So spare me the spade.

But dont point towards a few muslim ruler and draw a blanket conclusion. How can you forget Akbar and Shah jahan.
Though not a Mughal but Tipu Sultan was also a muslim.But Tipu had many hindus in his ministry like the other Mughals.His army had successfully employed the iron cased cylinder rockets,that sent chills down the spine of Britishers.Had britishers not looted and plundered India....then to this date India would have had communal harmony.They divided India,they had sown the seed of communal violence before leaving India.
And did you by any chance forget Netaji Subhash Chandra bose's contribution in the formation of INA????
British made railways....for their own good.It facilitated the movement of their men/army easily across the length and breadth of India.

And about sati.....brace up for the surprises.:devil:
Mughal emperor Humayun was the first to try a royal fiat against sati.
Akbar was next to issue official general orders prohibiting sati and insisted that no woman could commit sati without the specific permission of his Chief police officers.The Chief police officers were instructed by him to delay the woman's decision for as long as possible.Pensions, gifts and rehabilitative help were offered to the potential sati to persuade her from committing the act.
Tavernier writing in the reign of Shah Jahan,observed that widows with children were not allowed in any circumstances to burn and that in other cases, governors did not readily give permission, but could be bribed to do so.
And here comes the biggest surprise for you........
The emperor Aurangzeb was the strongest opponent of sati among the Mughals. In December 1663 he issued an "order that in all lands under Mughal control, never again should the officials allow a woman to be burnt".
Madam Do char or auragzeb or ho jaate to vaise bhi sabhi hindu aurtoo ko toh sati hi hona padta nhi toh mughlo ki harem me toh line lagi rehti thi........... Anyway not supporting sati prtha here but plz dont defend auranzeb kind of goons like they were savior for hindu women...... Or should I give list of war bounty right from Bin Qasim to great great Akbar......?
 
.
im proud of the fact that i was one of those that brought that dispeuted structure down that day on dec 6 1992 .....its owr nation and orignal ram mandir was demolished by a invader who erected a mosque over it im proud that we hindus took it back still so called dispeuted structures/masjids are standing over krishna janm bhoomi and kashi vishwanath if muslims want to live with peace they need to hand ovwer them to hindus .......Har Har Mahadev

There were too many Hijras in our country - then, to stop what lunatics like you, did to our country. Not again, No --- not again. Untill every person, not high on fundamentalist bhaang, is dead, it wont happen again. PERIOD!
Jai Hind!!
 
.
pakistan should focus on Ahmedias, Shias, Christians, and Hindus & Sikhs. Rather than poking their crooked noses in India's internal problems.
 
.
We're in the same house, and that's why it is damn business to keep shitheads like you in check. And what I try to keep in check is not how you follow your religion, but how you portray it to outsiders. Now, let me remind what you'd said:



Which is neither criticism nor a confrontation. I'd welcome either because it suggests that you're open to discussion. You plugged your ears running in circles screaming 'la la la i cant hear u... u stupid' - my 8 year old nephew often does the same.



Yep, clearly, it's us liberals forcing shit down people's throats, ainnit?!
We are in the same house u said, and its ur job u said. Now tell me "Dear Sir" How did I portray my religion in a bad manner. Please kindly, point it out for me. Or stopping the ones who make fun of our religion is bad too. Or are u just too much an apologetic, to even see whats going on. Stop with the mentality of oh please dont argue with them, we are already considered bad. Please!


Lets see what and how u will explain ur post, and quoting me, and make sure that u do point out that how and why did I merit your rant.

pakistan should focus on Ahmedias, Shias, Christians, and Hindus & Sikhs. Rather than poking their crooked noses in India's internal problems.
And by that token indians should worry about their own house, and not to bother with ours.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom