Muslims won't give up Babri Masjid : Razakars

[Kompromat]

Closed for a cleanup.

 

[Kompromat]

As a matter of fact, Muslims would never build a Hindu temple in Mecca, so why so much heart-burn over a similar issue?

No, because there are no Hindus in Mecca and therefore there is no need for it. If there were any, they would have one.



Thread opened.

 

[notsuperstitious]

No, because there are no Hindus in Mecca and therefore there is no need for it. If there were any, they would have one.



Thread opened.

That logic is lame. There were no Muslims in India once, now there are thousands mosques. There were no Muslims in Persia once, when Arabs invaded, they built mosques by destroying fire temples.

Thats the same logic Taliban used to destroy Baminayn statues, when in reality the statues were made when there were no muslims there. Heck Mecca itself belonged to another religion when Muslims won it by force and broke the statues just like they did everywhere else, including thousands of places in India. Sikandar Butsikan anyone, today kashmir is majority muslims thanks to force, if left to these lunatics it will be 100% muslim and then the same lame logic will be applied some more.

Trying to pull a fast one, are we?




PS there are hundred of thousands of hindus in Saudi, and no Hindu temple. Thats the reality, as against cheap lip service.

 

[KS]

Neither are Hindus going to give up on the Mandir. Period. They never gave up for 400 years when the mandir was initially destroyed and will never give up in the future. Too much blood has been shed for any of us to be going back. We Hindus have this one country for ourselves. If we are denied the right to build a mandir at one of our most sacred sites, I cant believe it.

If the Muslims had been gracious enough to acknowledge the importance of Ayodhya to Hindus and decided to voluntarily give up the claims to the disputed structure, then most of the historical wrongs would have just been forgotten, a right wing revival would have been nipped in the bud and a new beginning would have started. But a complete lack of foresight amongst their leaders made sure history was not forgotten and new right wing movement was revived which was lying low after decades of congress rule. This lack of foresight was also exemplified by the decision of the BMAC to not abide by the Allahabad high court order and take the issue to the SC.

Look at Somnath - the premise is exactly the same. A holy temple (Somnath is one of the 12 Jyotirlingas) was destroyed by a barbarian invader and a mosque built on top of it. But once we got freedom that was rectified and the original status restored when the current Somnath temple was reconstructed and the mosque was shifted to a nearby site where the Hidnus and the GoI helped build it. Now there is no problem there. Similarly had some had the foresight to do the same in Ayodhya things would not have to this situation where the country is sharply polarized on religious lines on this topic. It would have been gradually forgotten and things would have been normal. The more and more this issue is dragged, the more and more stands are hardened on either sides and finally if it comes to numbers, then there is only one side that is going to win and IMO that is only a pyrrhic victory.

The premise is simple - already a mandir is existing there and it functions as such with devotees allowing regular darshans and with all the pooja done. What needs to be done is the expansion of the temple. And it will be done. And one thing must be understood by all - if the existing Ram temple is touched in Ayodhya, then they must be ready for the consequences.

And before anybody comes with the "we are secular this" "we are secular that"..understand we are secular and tolerant only because the majority wants it, not because the minority demands its. Don't upset that balance. There is a limit to everything.

 

[KS]

Dude two wrongs does not makes one right.. What did any one achieved by destroying the mosque?? Where is the ram temple now?? The destruction was done centuries ago.. muslims have to pay for it now??Some groups are using these kind of things for communal tensions and people fell for it..

Re the bolded part,

[/IMG]

 

[Luffy 500]

Babri maszid episode showed the true communal side of India both their common public and their so called secular congress and BJP. If muslims were not 10 % of Indian populations, they would have been slaughtered to extinction today.

 

[KS]

Dude those million places are suitable for building temples too.. They do not want the sacred site, they want the mosque to be rebuilt in the place where it was situated..

Unfortunately for them that site is one of the holiest in Hinduism where it is believed that Lord Ram was born and it was the site where it has been archaelogically proved there existed a mandir. Some historical mistakes have to faced and corrected if we as a nation are going to survive. There is no point in trying to brush them under a carpet and hoping they will magically vanish.

Seiko, unfortunately you just dont get the importance of the site to the Hindus. There is no point in looking at this issue from a sole law and order perspective. There is much more than that. It involved the collective faith of a billion people.

 

[livingdead]

As per law muslims are right, its their land hence they should be able to have the mosque there.
But hindus will keep fighting till then get it. This is impossible to settle in court.

 

[rubyjackass]

The destruction of the mosque was in bad taste, illegal and unfortunate, however that has no bearing n the court decision.

That is absurd. What you seem to say is that the courts would have ordered the destruction of mosque by themselves anyway. That is impossible under the constitution.

That is why what I argue is that we freeze January 26th 1950 as a cut-off day. Whatever is existing on the ground before that date should be considered national heritage and has to be preserved as such.
There is no point digging into history without knowing where it ends.

I have no doubt Muslims felt bad about it. Similarly there are authentic records of hundreds and thousands of Hindu temples destroyed by Muslims over a millenia, I have no doubt Hindus feel bad about it too.

I have the same question. If we start correcting the wrongs that happened in history, where does it end?

The likes of MIM survive on fear, they will milk this for their survival, but court decision will be final. MIM can kiss my backside if they do not like the decision.

Actually anyone who wants to do politics on the issue can kiss my backside, its a non issue and Indians must concentrate on whats important.

I agree with the last line. But I prefer the issue to be put in cold storage for ever. No temple, no mosque. Just let the government take it over and build a memorial.

 

[notsuperstitious]

As per law muslims are right, its their land hence they should be able to have the mosque there.
But hindus will keep fighting till then get it. This is impossible to settle in court.

The court has already ruled.

 

[rubyjackass]

As per law muslims are right, its their land hence they should be able to have the mosque there.
But hindus will keep fighting till then get it. This is impossible to settle in court.

Thanks for agreeing with the truth man. Many Hindus are not honest about this. They argue bitterly based on historical arguments without realizing this.

 

[livingdead]

The court has already ruled.

I meant it is really not settled. And court has tried to balance it (something for both) which is actually unfair to muslims (the aggrieved party)
Have not all india barbi masjid action comittee appealed against the verdict?

Thanks for agreeing with the truth man. Many Hindus are not honest about this. They argue bitterly based on historical arguments without realizing this.

Emotions can cloud the judgement of even most rational person, and this is religious matter ( emotion + mass hysteria + delusion )

 

[KS]

As per law muslims are right, its their land hence they should be able to have the mosque there.
But hindus will keep fighting till then get it. This is impossible to settle in court.

The law which guarentees the status quo of structures as on Aug 15 1947 does NOT cover Ayodhya. You can check up on that. So technically the demolition itself was not in contravention to any law. Perhaps cases can be filed for unlawful assembly, rioting etc. That is to it.

 

[KingMamba]

That logic is lame. There were no Muslims in India once, now there are thousands mosques. There were no Muslims in Persia once, when Arabs invaded, they built mosques by destroying fire temples.

Thats the same logic Taliban used to destroy Baminayn statues, when in reality the statues were made when there were no muslims there. Heck Mecca itself belonged to another religion when Muslims won it by force and broke the statues just like they did everywhere else, including thousands of places in India. Sikandar Butsikan anyone, today kashmir is majority muslims thanks to force, if left to these lunatics it will be 100% muslim and then the same lame logic will be applied some more.

Trying to pull a fast one, are we?




PS there are hundred of thousands of hindus in Saudi, and no Hindu temple. Thats the reality, as against cheap lip service.

Nope Mecca always belonged to Islam, your post just shows general lack of Islamic theology. Saudi law is different Hindus living there do so for work and work alone even Muslims of other countries can work and work alone. They are not allowed to own property so permanent residence is out of the question, so building a temple in that situation is pointless. The only reason Muslim immigrants have mosques is because the Saudis themselves are Muslims.

The Iran part is laughable to because the Ummayads did not want the Iranians to embrace Islam and relented for 300 years as the Iranian tax was making them rich. It was the Persians who embraced it themselves and evolved the concepts (Sufism being one) which then spread to other places and people like the Turks and the people of the subcontinent.

 

[KS]

Thanks for agreeing with the truth man. Many Hindus are not honest about this. They argue bitterly based on historical arguments without realizing this.

History says that a temple existed underneath the mosque and ASI has documented it clearly. What history are you talking about ?

Nope Mecca always belonged to Islam, your post just shows general lack of Islamic theology.

No..it belonged to the Arabian pagans until your Prophet decided one fine day to raze it down.

And similarly Ayodhya had always belonged to Hindus until an invader decided to pull it down and build a victory structure there.