Protests in Pakistan after Ayodhya judgement on babri masjid

[Bhairava]

No it does not. Babri Mosque has no high religious value to Muslim. Its not Mecca or Jerusalem. Some Indian king built a 3rd grade mosque on some ruins of something and been left unattended for 100's of years. Suddenly Hindu fanatics made that as a high value asset and uncounted number of Muslim died. Its not outsiders problem as long as Muslim are not persecuted and killed on the street. If it does then it becomes an international issue and we should protest in due platform. Before that, lets India deal with it.

True except the bolded part -

1)the land was always sacred to Hindus.It was what Bethlehem is to Christians & Mecca/Medina is to Islam.

2)the title suit of "Who owns the land" was in the courts 5 decades before the disputed structure was demolished.

Both of them have no connection and also it was not the Mulsims who alone were killed.

Google Mumbai bomb blasts of 1993 and abt a terrorist called Dawood Ibrahim.

 

[TopCat]

True except the bolded part -

1)the land was always sacred to Hindus.It was what Bethlehem is to Christians Mecca/Medina is to Islam.

2)the title suit of "Who owns the land" was in the courts 5 decades before the disputed structure was demolished.

Both of them have no connection and also it was not the Mulsims who alone were killed.

Google Mumbai bomb blasts of 1993 and abt a terrorist called Dawood Ibrahim.

Well, Mosque is 500 years old not decades. I heard about Kashi etc as sacred place but never about that Mosque till recently. I also heard that the Puruhit raped a lady inside that sacred place so that Babor demolish that eshtablishment and built the mosque.

The time we talked about, a king was entitled to give away land to anybody which was the law the land of that time.

Anyways things are settled now and Muslim needs to move on. Hindus seems like going to build a Ram Mandir there which is good as they think that is their sacred place like Bethelham. Muslim should build a Memorial on their part of the land instead of mosque remembering the People killed by the onslaught of Hindu fanatics.

Mumbai attack or Daud Ibrahim is irrelevant to this case, so does Kashmir.

 

[temujin]

u call babar barbarian becoz he destroyed a temple, but what u call the people who destroyed the mosque, hindutwa barbarian??, and the justic system which just plundered the hearts of muslims by giving 2.3rd lands to non muslims.

I don`t see any comments on here from Indians celebrating the destruction of the Babri mosque. What Babar did was wrong and so were the actions of the miscreants who demolished the mosque. As many have already stated here, numerous temples were destroyed by invaders in the past but two wrongs do not make a right, which is why the Indian govt has promolgated legislation freezing the status of all religious structures, to preempt any further attempts to "put right" historical wrongs.

Granting the whole piece of land to muslims and removing the idols would cause huge resentment among the majority population and therefore the court has gone for the most amicable settlement by granting 1/3 of the land to all three parties in the dispute. Also, the court appears to have dismissed the Sunni Waqf Board's case on the basis of limitation and therefore perfectly within the law. So are those insisting that the land be handed over to muslims arguing that the law of the land be set aside to respect muslim sentiments whilst at the same time crying hoarse that the current judgment panders to Hindu religious sentiments???

Although some sections of muslims may be disappointed by this, it does pave the way for a mandir and masjid to coexist next to each other, which I think is a great idea (unless you are approaching this from the notion of one's faith superiority over the other of course). Also, isn`t it true that its haram to build a mosque over a preexisiting religious structure. ASI evidence and geological survey by some western organisation (check wiki for details) does suggest some prexisting structure underneath the Babri mosque.

What would granting the whole land to the muslims have acheived anyway? A hollow victory for the muslim community? That may be so, but it would have led to a festering wound that would poison inter faith relations for years to come.

I believe there would come a time when Hindus and Muslims can rise beyond religious differences just as in countries like Turkey (I don`t see any Orthodox Christians demanding the return of Hagia Sophia Mosque in Istanbul) and such issues would become immaterial, in India at least.

 

[Bhairava]

whats this meant to mean?

any sub continental muslim who wishes to take an active interest in the issue of the masjid is entitled to do so, it is his right, your link does not disprove anything.

stop being so hindu-centric, if that is at all possible for you, not every person in the sub continent has to follow your faith just because you feel it is more important

it is supposed to indicate to you that not all Indian Muslims have that Blind hatred to Hindus like you people.

Most of them are moderate and understand the importance that we Hindus attach to Ayodhya.

It is/will be difficult for a person from a "Islamic Republic" to understand.But thats not my issue.

like i say, dont let rapine and murder win.

Tell this to ppl who have almost exterminated minorities in Pakistan,support a state sponsored persecution thru the "Blasphemy laws" and those who wrote Kaffir on the body of a dead Pakistani Hindu.

 

[Areesh]

AHA. So now you have no problem in highlighting the sectarian differences between Muslims, but when some people say the same about Kashmir - not that I personally agree to it - then its "Ummah, all Muslims are same".

Sauce, my dear friend, is same for goose and gander.

Yaar is it necessary to bring Kashmir, Ummah etc etc in every issue. My point is clear. Bring me the statement of any prominent sunni religious scholar saying the same thing. And I would accept it. Simple. Why make ruckus over things which you can't answer.

Arey bhai..legally this case took place within India..but arent you taking a interest and dicussing it how Muslims are wronged.(?!?!?!)

So whats the problem if a Muslim sect,that too within India gives its opinions.

Moreover the leader of this Husseini Tigers is an influential member of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board.

So they have a legitimate interest.



But arent All Muslims supposed to be the same thru a concept called Ummah that you guys so often peddle in Kashmir.?

Again the same Kashmir ummah Blah Blah. I don't know why Indians resort to manipulations/ distortions when they are at the end of arguments. It doesn't matter whether the leader of this husseini tigers is influential in Muslim personal law board or not. More important thing is that other members of Muslim personal law board accept his version/verdict or not. Not to mention those other members of Indian muslim personal law board make the majority of muslims of India. Having just influence doesn't means he has the legitimate interest.

As I said bring me the same type of statement from other sunni scholars/organizations and I would accept that this statement from Husseini tigers is based on Indian secularism and not some sectarian differences.

Sorry you haven't done anything like that yet.

 

[Bhairava]

Well, Mosque is 500 years old not decades. I heard about Kashi etc as sacred place but never about that Mosque till recently. I also heard that the Puruhit raped a lady inside that sacred place so that Babor demolish that eshtablishment and built the mosque.

I was talking abt the title suit not the disputed structure and abt the rap*e well you heard wrongly.

The time we talked about, a king was entitled to give away land to anybody which was the law the land of that time.

Does that law aat the time sanction demolishing a temple in one of Hindus most sacred places and building a mosque.?

Anyways things are settled now and Muslim needs to move on. Hindus seems like going to build a Ram Mandir there which is good as they think that is their sacred place like Bethelham. Muslim should build a Memorial on their part of the land instead of mosque remembering the People killed by the onslaught of Hindu fanatics.

g
I dont care if a mosque or a memmorial or even a multiplex is built in the 1/3 of the land allotted to Muslims.Its their land and they can do whatever with it.

All I want is a Ram Temple in the 2/3 of the land with a no-mans land inbetween.

Mumbai attack or Daud Ibrahim is irrelevant to this case, so does Kashmir.

Sorry u are mis-informed.Mumbai Blasts were orchestrated by Dawood Ibrahim as a revenge for the demolition of the disputed structure.It is not related to Kashmir.

 

[Bhairava]

Again the same Kashmir ummah Blah Blah. I don't know why Indians resort to manipulations/ distortions when they are at the end of arguments. It doesn't matter whether the leader of this husseini tigers is influential in Muslim personal law board or not. More important thing is that other members of Muslim personal law board accept his version/verdict or not. Not to mention those other members of Indian muslim personal law board make the majority of muslims of India. Having just influence doesn't means he has the legitimate interest.

As I said bring me the same type of statement from other sunni scholars/organizations and I would accept that this statement from Husseini tigers is based on Indian secularism and not some sectarian differences.

Sorry you haven't done anything like that yet.

And where did I claim that Sunni Muslims said that.

Shias said that and I appreciate them for that.For an ordinary Hindu Indian Shias and Sunnis are the same.They are Muslims..Heck the majority doesnt even know whats the difference between a Shia and a Sunni.

So if you bring the Ummah then all of them should speak in one voice which they have not.

So there is no ummah or atleast practically no.Simple.

Also the Sunnis are not as moderate and sensible as the Shias.Atleast the majority is not.

 

[Areesh]

And where did I claim that Sunni Muslims said that.

Shias said that and I appreciate them for that.For an ordinary Hindu Indian Shias and Sunnis are the same.They are Muslims..Heck the majority doesnt even know whats the difference between a Shia and a Sunni.

So if you bring the Ummah then all of them should speak in one voice which they have not.

So there is no ummah or atleast practically no.Simple.

Also the Sunnis are not as moderate and sensible as the Shias.Atleast the majority is not.

Same rant. No proof.

According to bold part the majority of Indian muslims aren't moderate and sensible.

 

[Bhairava]

Same rant. No proof.

According to bold part the majority of Indian muslims aren't moderate and sensible.

How much is it difficult for you guys to understand that this place is sacred to Hindus million of times more than to Muslims to whom this is just another place of worship.

And I stand by what I said - Shias worldover are much more moderate than the Sunnis.

 

[bigbrother]

How much is it difficult for you guys to understand that this place is sacred to Hindus million of times more than to Muslims to whom this is just another place of worship.

And I stand by what I said - Shias worldover are much more moderate than the Sunnis.

they know everything, and understand everything.
they are arguing only for the sake of it.
dont waste ure brain cells.
its not worth it.

 

[Anonymous_Clown]

The problem with Pakistanis is that they think they are the 'Thekedars' of Muslims all over the world. They get into paroxysms or rage when things happen in Chechnya, USA, Palestine, Kashmir - anywhere in the world.

Look at this comment:

this issue effects all sub continental muslims, its not just india's issue, the historical ties transcend this.

You decided to have your Pakistan, you got it, and you can worry about the Muslims there. Don't start this bullshitting of 'subcontinental Muslims'. We will start worrying about the persecuted Ahmadiyas, Shias, Christians and Hindus in Pakistan if you persist in poking your nose where you are not wanted.

 

[Areesh]

How much is it difficult for you guys to understand that this place is sacred to Hindus million of times more than to Muslims to whom this is just another place of worship.

And I stand by what I said - Shias worldover are much more moderate than the Sunnis.

OK. According to bold part the majority of Indian muslims aren't moderate and sensible.

 

[Jungibaaz]

And I stand by what I said - Shias worldover are much more moderate than the Sunnis.

Interesting, how did you come to that conclusion???? are you Shiah or Sunni?

 

[Bhairava]

OK. According to bold part the majority of Indian muslims aren't moderate and sensible.

Interesting, how did you come to that conclusion???? are you Shiah or Sunni?

See around the world - From Abu Sayyaf in Phillipine to Kashmir to LeT to TTP to Taaliban to Iraq to Hamas to Saudi Wahabbis to Sudan,Somalia almost all those professing extremist methods are Sunnis.

 

[EgO Boy]

In Pakistan, i dont want even a dog to die protesting against this verdict coz 90% of indian muslims who i met r happy with this verdict, so pls my dear country men, let them have what they want, there blood have gone white.