The Ram Janmbhoomi Verdict: News and Discussion

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Oct 2010 11:50

ramana wrote:How about a boycott campaign for the advertisers on NDTV?

Ramana Sir,

This is unlikely to work. Coming from the associated field I go through frustration of finding possible national advertising spot everyday. NDTV is NOT on top of menu for most Advertising fellows anyways.

What can work is a sustained expose on the net on NDTV website. Specially places like FB where most anchors maintain their profiles and try to interact.

But My question is why NDTV onlee. IBN ain't doing a great job either nor are major English newspapers.

I must say Hindu litigants are NOT doing great job in articulating their view point either.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Oct 2010 12:11

Dear A Gupta,

I find your post really revealing here. But I am still able to dissect them enough to understand your point. Is it:

1) that you are saying that since Hindu's didn't make fuss about the issue during Mughul and British period therefore we should not make a fuss about it now?

2) or you are trying to say that, there is NO evidence of a Mandir / palace / pre Mughul place of worship, at the disputed place so Hindu litigants are all wrong in claiming that the place in question has nothing to do with Lord Ram?

On point one, I don't think Hindus had any choice. We were being subjugated by foreign forces and they didn't care much about our beliefs anyways. Both English and Mughuls looked at Hindusm from the lens of paganism so they had something in common their.

On point two, if Hindus are looking at wrong place then who will guide us to the right one? Muslims? What should be the basis to disprove that the land in question is NOT RJB? Or to prove that it is? lets come to an understanding of this. let's kinda make a 'Term Sheet'.

Everything said and done, this not a legal or political question. This is a question of faith. I believe that at certain point in history much before Prophet (may peace be upon him) and Jesus there was a righteous King Rama. His story somehow evokes great sentiments and acts of faith among the local population. For centuries he is being referred to as 'Purshotum' (First among the men). His story and his persona is the cornerstone of my religion my beliefs and my being. And like me millions others. He taught us love and he taught us how to conduct ourselves in the highest degree of moral behavior.

it is my belief that he was born at a certain point in Ayodhya (according to Ramayana). Inspired by his story and his faith I visit Ayodhya and find that at the exact spot there is a Mosque. A building which brings together people of a different faith. Who do not share the same sentiments as mine but follow the teachings of another great man who is alien to my land and culture.

So I say to the people occupying that building that long before you came here, this land belonged to my King and Lord Rama. Will it be too much to ask if you shift your base a km to right or left and let me worship here? If you say NO. Then why not?

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 18 Oct 2010 12:15

Shashi Tharoor on RJB verdict

Many Hindus claim that the Babri Masjid stood on the precise spot of Ram’s birth and had been placed there by Babur to remind a conquered people of their subjugation. But many historians – most of them Hindu sorry, left-wing loonies have their own religion and it is not Hinduism – argue that there is no proof that Ram ever existed in human form, let alone that he was born where believers claim.

More to the point, they argue, there is no proof that Babur demolished a Ram temple to build his mosque. Thus, to destroy the mosque and replace it with a temple was not righting an old wrong but perpetrating a new one. The Archaeological Survey of India, however, reported the existence of ruins beneath the demolished mosque that might have belonged to an ancient temple. You really need to go through the judgment, Shashi before making such statements.

For decades after independence, Indian governments guaranteed Muslims’ security in a secular state, permitting the retention of Islamic “personal law” separate from the country’s civil code and even subsidizing pilgrimages to Mecca. How are backward and medieval laws related to the security of Indian Muslims???

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Oct 2010 12:41

Airavat wrote:Shashi Tharoor on RJB verdict

Dear Mr Tharoor,

I take personal offense to your assertion that Lord Rama never existed as a person. Your remarks are based on studies done by some 'Hindu' historians who have not found any proof of his existence. Why Sir, do you choose to ignore the studies done many more Hindu historians / theologians and archeologists who have proven the point on the contrary?

In absence of a Birth Certificate what are the ways you suggest we can prove or disprove Lord Rama's existence? And how that process will be different from proving existence of Krishna, Budha and Mahavira?

Further, why doesn't Congress, English media and Muslims come out and start saying it openly in your rallies and interviews? Remind you that in the judgement of High court not one litigant questioned the existence of Lord Rama. The court has even gone further and granted Ram Lalla a legal status.

anchal · Post by **anchal** » 18 Oct 2010 13:37

^ Sri, I guess it would make more sense to mail Tharoor directly, if you have not already done so. Sadly a purely secularized mind as his cannot be cured by Sunanda either. See how Marxist historians are identified as Hindus - intellectual dishonesty!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Oct 2010 13:56

Sri wrote: I take personal offense to your assertion that Lord Rama never existed as a person. Your remarks are based on studies done by some 'Hindu' historians who have not found any proof of his existence. Why Sir, do you choose to ignore the studies done many more Hindu historians / theologians and archeologists who have proven the point on the contrary?

With respect this is the wrong route to take to attack a person like Tharoor. The correct route is to say "I admire your courage in saying that Rama, like other mythical troublemakers such as Mohammad and Jesus Christ did not exist. You have won yourself a fan. Thank you for being an enlightened and secular person in this troubled world"

If I say that you farted, you do not respond by saying "No". You respond by saying "We are all farting".

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Oct 2010 14:05

anchal wrote:^ Sri, I guess it would make more sense to mail Tharoor directly, if you have not already done so. Sadly a purely secularized mind as his cannot be cured by Sunanda either. See how Marxist historians are identified as Hindus - intellectual dishonesty!

Anchal, Thanks for the suggestion. I am in process of drafting a mail to not only Shashi Tharoor but also likes of Javed Naqvi (who's article I am going to post below, Bharkha Dutt, Rajdeep Sadesai etc....

Here is an article published in Yawn by javed Naqvi

For one he and I agree that there is no legal or political solution to this. Hence it's worth putting forth the argument to him.

He starts with a curious fable:

According to the story, a hungry lion spotted a fawn that was drinking water from the same forest stream as him and decided to make a meal of the baby deer. But being the king of the jungle the lion was prone to guilt pangs and required a veneer of responsibility. He clearly needed an excuse to attack the helpless creature. So he first pulverised the fawn with a predatory roar, and then ambled to a whispering distance from his quarry.

“How dare you drink from the same stream as I? You have polluted the water.” The lion thundered menacingly. “But please sir, I am here downstream and you were perched up there, upstream, so how could I pollute your share of the water? There’s a mistake.” The fawn’s logic didn’t please the lion. “Well, well, well. Aren’t you the rascal that hurled abuses at me at the forest fair last year?” The famished beast roared, changing his argument.

“Your majesty,” the shaken fawn replied with mock bravery. “I am not even a year old yet, so how could I have been at the fair where someone seems to have abused you last year?” The impatient lion didn’t wait for another chance. “If it wasn’t you then it must have been your father or your grandfather who abused me, and now you must pay for it.” Just as he had planned at the outset, the lion easily killed the baby deer which was no more than a morsel for him. But since his appetite was enormous he resumed the search for his next meal. Or so goes the fable.

In this story there should be no fawn. Instead their should be another young lion from a different jungle who dares to drink water from the same river as our other lion. Other lion doesn't like this at all. He is ok with sharing the limited source of food. But he feels he can't share his fav water spot with this new guy as he is too emotionally attached to it. So he asks the new lion to move on. New lion refuses and says please prove how this is your fav spot first. This challenge to authority pisses of our old lion who till now was the undisputed king of the jungle. Here in greater jungle harmony he is trying to accommodate a foreign upstart but the upstart's sense on ownership is a direct threat to the Lion. Hence he promptly shoos the new upstart to the next best spot 100 mts downstream. Upstarts now drinks water from this new spot, which just as good and strikes a lasting friendship with the older lion and both of them start a tribe together.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Oct 2010 14:08

shiv wrote:If I say that you farted, you do not respond by saying "No". You respond by saying "We are all farting".

Point taken Sir. I'll take this approach while writing to Mr Tharoor.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 18 Oct 2010 14:17

A variety of steps, some short term and some very long term need to be taken to counter the Stalinist propaganda puppets embedded in media and so-called 'civil society' to spread the lies originating from the Nandigram rapist goon HQ...

1. The bankruptcy of the Stalinist rapist goons and their political and economic ideology and its massive failure in practically every society, not to speak of India where they are now begging overseas and domestic money-bags they demonised not too long ago, for investment, should be highlighted and made known to Indians of every age class and status. This is unfortunately not done by our history books most often controlled by the rapist goons and their JNU puppet cabal. The definite connections between our own Stalinist murderers and their overseas collegues including the likes of Pol Pot, Great leader/Dear leader Kim and other such despicable characters whose praises were sung by Marxist media should be highlighted. (case in point - even the most recent editorial on Kim by the stalinist yellow daily only refers to him as 'enigmatic')

2. The fake history promoted by these scum should be countered by real history - but this needs massive support in the form of properly and scientifically written books for various age groups which can be made available at cheap prices in various languages. This takes lots of time, money, sponsorship...

3. Many of these yellow media are actually controlled by money-bags who have real interest in keeping their money. For instance one prominent yellow weekly that often runs anti-hindu articles by evangelist journalists, (that keep their evangelist credentials secret by using short names) is controlled by a real estate company. Such outfits are vulnerable to pressure if it is exerted in the right way...

4. A commercial boycott is tough but can be done selectively and on set an example basis. Take the biggest sponsor or may be the second or the third biggest, and go after him....

5. Anyone that has Indian interests in mind should never be seen giving interviews to such media outfits. Then the only lie they can utter is through 'anonymous sources' which the rapist goon yellow daily routinely does in every article on such topics. Again this is tough to implement in practice but a few prominent leaders should vocally declare their intention to stay away citing correct reasons.

It is a tough road...but can be travelled...

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 18 Oct 2010 18:59

Posting this for some interesting parallels....

Bethlehem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlehem) is the supposed birthplace of Jesus Christ. While there are questions regarding the historicity of Jesus (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus), most Christians believe the Church of Nativity in Bethlehem (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_the_Nativity) to be sacred, given that tradition and faith holds the church to be built on the very cave that is regarded as the exact birthplace of Jesus.

In 637AD, Bethlehem was captured by Muslim armies, and here is where the parallel collapses - the Muslim Caliph promised that the Church of Nativity would remain for Christian use, and did not sack the church. Obviously Islam had a different degree of respect for a fellow Abrahamic religion, that they never had for the pagans.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Oct 2010 19:08

http://www.eenadu.net/archives/archive- ... panel7.htm

AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board) has unanimously decided to appeal to Supreme court on RJB Issue.

Salient points
- Allahabad court verdict is against the fundamentals of secularism {I love it when a forum like AIMPLB talks about secularism}
- Court put more emphasis on faith than facts and law
- It doesn’t have any objection for out of court settlement but the proposals must be per Shariat .

They clarified that Shariat doesn’t allow relocation of mosque, or selling the land or gifting the land.

They also clarified that they do not have any objection to have mosque and temple side-by-side {That IS the secular agenda. It doesn’t matter if it is against law or facts or faith}

On a different note –

BJP senior leader Vinay Katiyar commented that “Muslims must forego their demands and pave the way for Ram Temple in the interests of the nation. Otherwise there will be nation-wide litigations on contentious lands.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 18 Oct 2010 19:12

There's been suggestions in some quarters that while the ASI report proves the existence of a grand temple that predated the mosque, that is not proof that the temple was demolished by Babur / Aurangzeb...it could have been built on top of existing ruins.

In order to study this hypothesis better, is there any example of a grand temple in those times that was allowed to decay to ruins or was ruined in any other manner than by conquest and where there was NO attempt to rebuild by Hindus after any such ruination event? To me that just does not make sense, but would be glad to be disabused by any specific pointers.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 18 Oct 2010 19:21

^

That is how litigation is played. If it doesn't make sense to an average person, then it is 'often' a nonsensical claim.

The best defense is that

- The opposition group "accepted" that there was a grand temple.
- If the opposition "thinks" that it was ruined (due to lack of care???), "the opposition" has to prove that it was the case indeed to the satisfaction of RJB committee. RJB committee finds it illogical for an invading thug to build a mosque in a temple location especially if the local population doesn't care for such grand structures.
- In the meantime RJB committee will rebuild the grand temple at that location.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Oct 2010 20:43

RamaY wrote:

On a different note –

BJP senior leader Vinay Katiyar commented that “Muslims must forego their demands and pave the way for Ram Temple in the interests of the nation. Otherwise there will be nation-wide litigations on contentious lands.

This will lead to question of the legitimacy of the Mogul rulers and all Islamic rule in the sub continent.
Any structure built in that period will be questioned and land ownership will be also become contentious.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2010 21:14

Suppiah, The fake -seculars get their power from the state support. Its the INC in power that powers their fake roars like the lion in the fable.

In the end all four upayas have to be used: Sama, dana, bedha and DANDA!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2010 21:38

What constitutes a legitimate government in modern times, pre-modern times and ancient times?

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Oct 2010 21:42

ramana wrote:What constitutes a legitimate government in modern times, pre-modern times and ancient times?

They quote Mogul rule atleast until 1857. We need to push is back to 1707 or earlier or completely make it illegitimate in the sub continent. That should be the national goal of India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2010 21:43

Not yet. Lets look at what factors makes a govt legitimate?

unarayanadas · Post by **unarayanadas** » 18 Oct 2010 21:48

ShyamSP wrote:
unarayanadas wrote:Dear Friends,

Angered by NDTV's blatant anti-Hindu coverage some friends have posted an online petition to the channel requesting it to mend its ways. The petition is online now. Please sign it by clicking on the link below - and pass it on to as many friends as possible with a request to sign it:

Indian Citizens Petition to NDTV

With regards,

Sincerely,
U. Narayana Das
I don't think these petitions work to change anything as they do these such campaigns intentionally. Those don't want to accept constitutional body decision don't deserve to be constitutionally handled.

When their risk profile is increased they automatically behave as in many cases we saw they apologized for any news item that hurt people they don't want to hurt as risk goes up as the hurt people do "peaceful" protests in front of their offices and rewards go down as their monthly bonuses are reduced from "peaceful" countries and "friendly agencies"

We believe filing online petitions is a democratic form of protest that the age of electronic communications affords us, something similar to hunger-strikes and 'rasta rokos' of the earlier era. Does every hunger-strike or 'rasta rokos' achieve its objective? Yes it does to the extent that it is an expression of a demand or anger. It is at least better than doing nothing or silently suffering.

You might not believe the volume of pent up anger that is finding form in the online petition. Within less than an hour of posting, more than a hundred petitioners signed and by this evening as this reply is being written the number zoomed to close to seven hundred. And you will have to read the comments posted by the signatories to understand the simmering fury that is gushing out. Is it an expression of impotent fury? It might be but we never know until we try. This method of protest is as good as any in the absence of a stronger or more effective form of protest, within the limitations of civility and democracy.

The next question is why take on only one channel when every other channel is doing much the same? Firstly there is no point in dissipating our energies by spreading them thin on the ground. Secondly let us understand the effect / implications of this mode of protest and draw whatever lessons it holds before extrapolating / replicating it.

You may choose to sign or not to sign the petition, but we invite you to visit the site and read the comments posted by the signatories.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 18 Oct 2010 21:51

Just signed the petition.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 18 Oct 2010 21:54

unarayanadas wrote:
You might not believe the volume of pent up anger that is finding form in the online petition. Within less than an hour of posting, more than a hundred petitioners signed and by this evening as this reply is being written the number zoomed to close to seven hundred. And you will have to read the comments posted by the signatories to understand the simmering fury that is gushing out.

We need atleast few millions. Talk in terms of millions and then we can count on this.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 18 Oct 2010 21:54

RamaY wrote:http://www.eenadu.net/archives/archive- ... panel7.htm

AIMPLB (All India Muslim Personal Law Board) has unanimously decided to appeal to Supreme court on RJB Issue.

Salient points
- Allahabad court verdict is against the fundamentals of secularism {I love it when a forum like AIMPLB talks about secularism}
- Court put more emphasis on faith than facts and law
- It doesn’t have any objection for out of court settlement but the proposals must be per Shariat .

They clarified that Shariat doesn’t allow relocation of mosque, or selling the land or gifting the land.

They also clarified that they do not have any objection to have mosque and temple side-by-side {That IS the secular agenda. It doesn’t matter if it is against law or facts or faith}

On a different note –

BJP senior leader Vinay Katiyar commented that “Muslims must forego their demands and pave the way for Ram Temple in the interests of the nation. Otherwise there will be nation-wide litigations on contentious lands.

I have been waiting for the other shoe to drop. I am happy to see the AIMPLB follow up this case to the Supreme court. All psuedo-seculars and media talking heads have been doing a great job prodding them on and finally they took the bait. It is time for fence sitting Hindus to decide on the fate of their matrubhoomi and this case more than anything else will help them make up their minds about the true nature of secularism in India. The battle for all Mandirs has just begun. We needed three and would have been happy with one but they wanted it to be fair. So we now intend to claim back all our rightful places of worship. Music to my ears.

unarayanadas · Post by **unarayanadas** » 18 Oct 2010 22:01

Pratyush wrote:Just signed the petition.

Thank you for singing the petition. May I request you to pass on the message to your friends, colleagues or family members with a request to sign it. The petitioners - which now includes you - plan to send the petition to NDTV with all the comments posted. The channel may ignore it in arrogance but we never know when we stumble upon the tipping point!

unarayanadas · Post by **unarayanadas** » 18 Oct 2010 22:04

Acharya wrote:
unarayanadas wrote:
You might not believe the volume of pent up anger that is finding form in the online petition. Within less than an hour of posting, more than a hundred petitioners signed and by this evening as this reply is being written the number zoomed to close to seven hundred. And you will have to read the comments posted by the signatories to understand the simmering fury that is gushing out.
We need atleast few millions. Talk in terms of millions and then we can count on this.

I am optimistic about it Sir. With your help and guidance we shall make the mark. It is less than 24 hours since the petition is posted online and we have a long long way to go.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2010 22:12

UND, The forum allows a signature block to your profile. Link that petition so it gets publicity in every psot of yours.

unarayanadas · Post by **unarayanadas** » 18 Oct 2010 22:16

ramana wrote:UND, The forum allows a signature block to your profile. Link that petition so it gets publicity in every psot of yours.

Thank you Ramanaji. Would you please explain how I can pin a link to every post?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 18 Oct 2010 22:20

i need to check with RahulM or Archan on the hows.

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 18 Oct 2010 23:14

Pratyush wrote:Just signed the petition.

Me too.

suryag · Post by **suryag** » 18 Oct 2010 23:19

The recent edition of frontline has articles from people who are very loved by BRF. Read and enjoy

frontline

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 18 Oct 2010 23:23

unarayanadas wrote:
Pratyush wrote:Just signed the petition.
Thank you for singing the petition. May I request you to pass on the message to your friends, colleagues or family members with a request to sign it. The petitioners - which now includes you - plan to send the petition to NDTV with all the comments posted. The channel may ignore it in arrogance but we never know when we stumble upon the tipping point!

I agree with you.
common man is not familiar with the news and its implications. By drafting letters and petitions, chain emails etc many of them become aware of the news. It is a small step in the right direction. Only awareness will lead to action. the petitions sent to many will lead to greater awareness however small it may be.
I agree also with tackling one at a time. ex NDTV here. One success will lead to more confidence and vigour in tackling many more in the media. Not to forget there are a zillions blogs which also highlight the above.

I have my own circle which I regularly post some comments and news clippings. Initially there was some disbelief and I was attacked by some for adopting 'non secularist' agendas.

I questioned their beliefs in the group. Over a period of months more people are questioning now the secularist groups. They are becoming more confident in saying things(" non secular") now. Also leftists have been brought into open and isolated.
Every little step helps us. we cannot disregard them.
UND and others please continue whatever you are doing.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2010 00:11

Bji, What unnerves the fake seculars the most?

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 19 Oct 2010 00:17

RamaY wrote:Salient points
- Allahabad court verdict is against the fundamentals of secularism {I love it when a forum like AIMPLB talks about secularism}
- Court put more emphasis on faith than facts and law
- It doesn’t have any objection for out of court settlement but the proposals must be per Shariat .

They clarified that Shariat doesn’t allow relocation of mosque, or selling the land or gifting the land.

They also clarified that they do not have any objection to have mosque and temple side-by-side {That IS the secular agenda. It doesn’t matter if it is against law or facts or faith}

The AIMPLB does not value Secularism at all. The real contrast is when this judgement is compared with Shah Bano case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shah_Bano_case

AIMPLB is arguing from both sides: One where they did not respect secular Supreme Court verdict on Shah bano case arguing that its a matter of faith. And in RJB, they want to now talk about secularism.

The way to deal with it is to involve Muslim moderates like Arif Mohhamad Khan etc. and make a common front so the core issues of Hindu faith are not trampled under secularism, just as core Christian/Sikh/Muslim issues are not trampled.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Oct 2010 00:36

^^^Karnaji you have wrongly attributed to me what was originally posted by RamaYji so credit is due to him for that post (link, quotes and his wisdom).

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2010 01:24

Fixed it. It happens because of the Forum rule that N^3 wanted to prevent multiple quotes. Net affect is one has to be careful whose post one is quoting.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 19 Oct 2010 01:32

ramana wrote:Bji, What unnerves the fake seculars the most?

Ramanaji, I am not sure if you meant to ask this to Jupiterji or me but I will give you my opinion.

Fake seculars have been in control of the nation ever since the British transferred power in 1947. They have used the last 63 years to seize control of all national institutions that have a role in influencing the thought processes of english educated urban citizens(i.e. the Indian citizen and not the Bharatiya nagrik). They worry that if and when the Indian citizen see through their chicanery, they would have lose their hold on power.

Thus the fake seculars have tried to shield Indian citizens from all other points of view that they considered counter to the one they propogated. Fake seculars formed a cabal and used every trick to malign all other people and idealogy which they considered as a threat to their own viewpoint. They have correctly assumed that once the Indian citizen is awakend from their slumber, they may begin to question the lies that the fake seculars fed them and eventually take their power away.

The role of the Fake seculars is limited to Indian citizens. These fake secular do not breathe and feel like the Bharatiya nagrik and thus have difficulty in influencing them with their lies. For example the Bharatiya nagrik has poorna asta in Bhagwan Ram's janambhoomi at Ayodhya whereas the Indian citizen cannot be bothered with the birthplace of the Mythological figure of Ram and thus keep asking, why the need for a temple there?

The fake seculars worry that there are folks (RJM types being one) who can bring about a confluence of the indentities of the Indian citizen and the Bharatiya nagrik and it is to that end you see all the past and current machinations of the fake seculars. The learned judges of the High Court tried something similar in their verdict and thus you see the energies of the fake seculars being expended in discrediting these judges. Anyone who runs counter to the agenda of the fake seculars will always be targetted. The more people they target, the better it is for us as it helps us gather strength from numbers. Thus I am happy to see these fake seculars keeping the issue of RJM alive.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 19 Oct 2010 03:43

unarayanadas wrote:Dear Friends,

Angered by NDTV's blatant anti-Hindu coverage some friends have posted an online petition to the channel requesting it to mend its ways. The petition is online now. Please sign it by clicking on the link below - and pass it on to as many friends as possible with a request to sign it:

Indian Citizens Petition to NDTV

With regards,

Sincerely,
U. Narayana Das

Barkha Dutt is a Modern school Graduate from Delhi, a school that is an elite school on lines of Eton. The school is of late more known for its rich spoilt brats aka "Wake up Sids". "Wake up Barkha" is not possible due to her more psedo-secular education at Jamila Milia. More about her.
http://whatho.satpathy.org/2009/02/04/i ... riticisim/

The right way is to attack NDTVs secular credentials. In politics, you should always attack the strength of others. The weaknesses are well known. So instead of branding it anti-Hindu, NDTVs secular credentials should be questioned. Once their secular credentials are broken they'll have nothing left to fall back on.

NDTV should be actually attacked for not sending Barkha(and group) to live among the Talibs and generate real life stories from there. Since they are only reporting on stories related to Hindus, they are pro-hindu. They should live among Talibans in Kandahar forever to prove their secular credentials and stop reporting on Hindu issues, living in Hindu cities and having Hindu rights and priviliges. If they come back alive, they'll be surely enlightened. If not well, true secularism demands sacrifice.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Oct 2010 04:00

A relevant book review by AG Noorani.

Two sides of nehru

I think I see only one side of the reviewer. He wants to destroy the state.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Oct 2010 07:58

If Shariat dont allow the moving of alleged Mosque then will it allow the moving of people with such alien thinking as Shariat is irrelevant if its goes against the Indian civilizational ethos. Either India civilizational values win or we question the legitimacy of Shariat since it originated in Arabian desert and non Indic in Shakal, Aqal and Makar.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 19 Oct 2010 08:15

Actually if Muslims agree to Shariat principle then it would be easy to win the case in court.

By Shariat, no mosque would have allowed shared worship with pagans / polytheists and pagan gods would not have been allowed inside mosque precints. However it has been clearly established that Hindu worship ( at least in the outer courtyard inside Mosque precints) was ongoing at least since mid 18th century if not earlier. By their own laws therefore, it could not have been a legitimate mosque.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 19 Oct 2010 09:07

^ Arjun

Muslims bring Sharia to the front only when they need concessions from non-muslims.

That is why the same Muslims do not have any issue praying in jnanavapi mosque even though they see Viswanatha temple ruins on the walls of the mosque. Who knows they might be looking at a devata murty when they pray in the mosque. If you see from viswanath temple the backside wall of the mosque is old temple upto 10ft height.

It is extremely sad that Indian skulls are so think that they fail to see this simple truth.