Ramjanmabhumi-Babri Masjid dispute – Views and Warnings

The Ramjanmabhumi-Babri Masjid dispute is due for judgement in September 2010.

It must be noted that inspite of overwhelming evidence presented to the courts in 1992, the Courts passed the decision back to the government. This angered the Hindus leading to the demolition of the Babri structure/mosque by a section of the karsevaks.

By threatening the courts that Bharat would be broken into pieces, the Mullahs are assuming that they will browbeat them to give a favourable judgement leading to reconstruction of Mosque. Watch this Mullah, Haasim Ansari issuing a warning to the Indian state.


( Courtesy Aapki Khabar)

This page would be updated for more news & views on this issue.

Some more relevant links




Koenraad Elst:  (Please read his book Ayodhya and After)
Some of the details are here
Here is the link to game that Muslim/Marxist/ Congress played

Another article by Dr. Elst

7th sept update :

The video where the warnings by Hasim Ansari threatening to break the country into pieces has since been removed by the owner who had uploaded the video. It shows that there is an organised effort to ensure that people who are threatening the country are protected.

15th Sept :

Very interesting perspective by Sri Aditya Sinha ” Demolitions, 1528 to 9/11″ considering that he is from a mainstream English media which is known to be anti-Hindu. Kudos to Aditya Sinha.


A rejoinder on 19th sept by Faizur Rahman to Aditya Sinha’s article :


Mr. Faiz coolly expresses that the Muslims have on record said that they would honour the court judgement. Who represents the Muslim  community? Has he forgotten Haamid Ansari’s, the mullah who is also a litigant warning ( on Aaj Ka Khabar) that the country would be torn to bits if the judgement goes against the Muslim community ?

He expresses horror over the RSS demand to have a legislation over the Ayodhya temple. Faiz asks the Hindus to be benign to the principles of Sanatana Dharma. In fact, the RSS and the BJP have on record said that they would respect the court judgement.

Mr.Faiz, the Hindu demand for legislation is because the track record of governments of overturning Supreme Court and High court judgement & directives are well known to the Hindus.

Have you also forgotten that the Congress governments have on numerous occasions appeased the Muslim community by over ruling the Supreme court judgements ? Have you forgotten the Shah Bano case?

Sept 19th 

Archaelogical Survey of India Report on Ayodhya


The chapter in BB Lal’s book is titled:

‘Was there a temple in the Janmabhumi area at Ayodhya preceding the construction of the Babari Masjid?’ See the vivid photos and read the remarkable Chapter II of BB Lal’s work URL reference:


28th Sept : The Supreme Court dismisses the petition to postpone the decision and asks the Allahabad High Court to give its judgement. Judgement is expected on 30th Sept 2010. The country awaits the most important judgement of the last one hundred years.

30th Sept 2010, 4:30 pm

The Allahabad High Court, Lucknow declares that the Ram Janmabhumi site belongs to Hindus. This a landmark judgement since the claim was that Rama was not born at that particular site.

Justice S U Khan, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Justice D V Sharma have pronounced the judgement in the Ayodhya title suit.

The Sunni Wakf board had challenged that the Rama was not born at the site. The court quashed this and clearly mentioned that the place where the Ramlala vighrahas are now, belong to the Hindus.

1/3 of land which belongs to Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi are going to be given for Nirmohi Akhara, which again belongs to the Hindus.

1/3 land is being allocated to the Wakf Board. No land has been demarcated for them as of now.

All Bharatiyas must celebrate this as the vindication of our national ideal, Maryada Purushotama Shri Rama..

My pranams to the lacs of karsevaks who made this happen, the Sants who lead the movement & the lawyers who have sustained this campaign.

meanwhile the Sunni Wakf board states that they are not satisfied with 1/3 land and they would go to the Supreme Court after reading the verdict completly.

6th Oct –

An article The tragedy of Indian Muslims is their leadership – Firoz Bhakt Ahmad


15 thoughts on “Ramjanmabhumi-Babri Masjid dispute – Views and Warnings

  1. Suhas Ranade

    Soniya Gandhi , Rahul Gandhi , Mulayam Singh yadav and all muslims should construct the biggest Ram Mandir at the exact site where Ramlalla murti is present at this time and No masjid should be built in entire ayodhya and no masjid in the name of Babar should be built in entire India . Shri Dharam Veer Sharma’s judjgement should be fully confirmed by the Hon supreme Court as the said judgement is a perfect and legally valid and enforceable judgement .

  2. Skanda

    Geeta Saxena ji,

    Kis baat keliye zameen ke bhag karne chahiye? Bharat ke to teen bhaag kar diye the Muslimo keliye.

    Abhi jane aur kitne bhaag ban-ne wale hai – Kashmir, Isanya…

    Aur kitne batware chahte hai? Ek hazaar saal se chala aaraha hai yeh – koi lutera aata hai, logoun ko marta hai, loot-ta hai, zameen cheen leta hai… kya aap jaante hai ki koi bharat bachega aise?

    Parishkar batwara nahi hai. Parishkar yeh hai ki jo lootne aate hai unhe sahi jawab mile. Unko hume lautana chahiye apne mandir, zameen.

    Kabhi to yeh galati sudhari jaye?

    Zaroori baat yeh nahi hai ki Ayodhya mei kitni badi apni mandir hai. Zaroori baat yeh hai, ki kabhi Congress aur Mussalman seekhenge Hindutva ka samman karna? Aaj to woh samajhte hai ki woh kuch bhi kar sakte hai aur Hinduoun ke paas koi chaara nahi hai.

    Itne saaloun mei ek mandir mila nahi hume, hazaaroun mandir thodne ke baad. Kabhi to yeh badle?

    Vivad kabhi khatm nahi hone wale hai – wajah yeh hai ki jisse aap ka pala pada hai uske swabhav hai aap se vivad karna, uska lakshya hai pure bharat ko hadap karna. Yeh baat aap samajh nahi rahe hai.

    You are not dealing with people who are accidentally pit against you, but with people whose *goal* is to subvert you. You have no way but to figure out giving back. You have no way but to fight out the mindset, change it by sending right messages to it.




  4. vijaykumar

    …Jesus Christ borned in Jerusalem ,Who knows,But Saints says & Bible Says & whole world belive no doubt about that.
    ….Mohammed Sahib Borned in Makka Madina,who knows,But Mullas say & Quran says & whole world belive no doubt about that.
    …..Shri Ram borned in Ayodhya Ramayan says it.Why doubts are there.

    …..Babar is muslim invader came India in 1520.Where as Shri Ram is God there should be no comparision & debate about that, Ram janm bhumi disputed sthal should go to Shri Ram Followers.

  5. Prasanna

    Dear VDS Prasad,

    On the contrary, it is because of the demolition that ASI could excavate certain things to prove the case, else it would have been a burning issue in the country forever. Can you imagine the Mosque to be shifted or demolished by government to make a way for temple? You may recall that it was indeed an idea by PV Narasimha Rao government to shift the Mosque, but Muslims opposed the idea that such Mosque built elsewhere cannot be sacred.

    Ongoing Television Debates:
    Since last few decades, Congress secularists were hiding behind Judiciary on Ayodhya dispute that only JUDICIARY can solve the problem (as mentioned in their successive election manifestos). And now just days before the pronouncement of the verdict, they were contemplaing to solve the problem through negotiations/’reconcilations’! Their dirty team suddenly woke up to rediscover a solution through various ‘other’ means while not showing any interest in putting sincere efforts to resolve the dispute during last 10 years. While Rahul Gandhi repeats the same mantra of his grand mother (Garibi hatao, Infrastructure, etc), his lawyer-advisor, Mr.Harish Salve initially did not wish the judgement to be postponed on a day before appearing in TV channel and supported the argument of Rahul Gandhi that its okay to stay the High Court verdict forever! His chameleon character did not stop there.. on the day when Supreme Court cleared the stay on delivering the HC verdict, he changed his stance once again – saying what Supreme Court did is correct – but only after obtaining the view of Congress government. The frustration of secularists is very clear as the day of judgement is coming closer. It is no wonder that they have already started using their plan-B by calling for concessions..apologies..reconcilation!

  6. VDS Prasad

    I have RSS background and believe everyone has to accept Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Rama; this is a matter of faith. Even before the demolition of the ‘masjid’, the construction of a Ram Mandir looked difficult in view of the irreconcilable differences. But post-demolition, the stand of the mandir opponents has become more rigid; construction of Ram mandir looks even more difficult because it has become a matter of prestige for both sides and no party would accept a court verdict that goes against them. Our leaders have not shown sagacity in dealing with the issue and have made no effort to carry along all sections. The result is the BJP lost its first government in UP and is now in no position to retrieve even half the ground lost, leave alone regaining power in UP. Whatever the merits of the case for Ram temple we have to accept the fact that the demolition was a blunder.

  7. S.Rajashekar

    All the gods are one 1st we are indians after only H or M so be peace & fight for your rights throug novilonce pls do not india to become like Srilanka…………

  8. Ram Kumar

    Behind the walls and smoke screens of secular media:


    An Insight into the Ayodhya Dispute

    Parampujaneeya Pejawar Swamiji, Parampujaneya dayananda Swamiji, my learned and elder friend Mananeeya Shri Devendra Swaroop ji, dear brothers and sisters. Today I read two articles in two important newspapers. One was written by a secular Hindu – Sujit Bhalla. Never in all his writings has he ever failed to condemn Hindus and Hinduism. Never,ever. This article appeared on the center page of the ‘Business Standard’, a very well-written article. The other article appeared in the asian age, again on the center page, writen by a very well-known lawyer from Bombay. Both have said the same thing in their respective articles – that there is only solution to the Ayodhya issue; that the Muslims should hand over the site to the Hindus. Never has a secularist dared so far to make this suggestion. Because this amounts to committing suicide. But then these secularists have been on the suicidal path for a long time now. Such a thought is to move away from the brink, as it were.

    Secularism has now relegated itself to the position of nuisance in this country. So this secularist has written that the only way to stop these Hindutvawadis is to hand over the site to the Hindus. The idea behind handing over the site to us is not to build the Ram temple or to bring about amity between the Hindus and Muslims but to stop the Hindu movement. But the Muslim lawyer has said something very different. It is an extraordinarily well-written piece. He says that the very fact that all Hindus believe that Rama was born there, is the only reason that is needed for handing over the site. But this article could not have appeared earlier. It could not have appeared because it is now becoming clear that this movement cannot be stopped. So this advise, this pontificating to the Hindus that Swamiji mentioned, is now beginning to be done to the other side. This is how the polity of India is changing. The polity of India abused Rama, the secularists poked fun at Rama. They said he was never born in India, he was born in Iran, maybe Iraq. He ruled maybe Egypt, but he was not born in India. Secularists, secular historians, secular intellectuals kept on writing papers after papers, articles after articles, issuing statement after statement, unchallenged in this country until the VHP decided to call their bluff.

    Never in the history of any country would a great tradition be demeaned like this. Because the English-educated intellectuals in India had no backbone. They had to be abused in good English, that is all. So the Ayodhya movement has changed the political map of India, the political idiom. The polity and its content, the political parties and their behaviour have all undergone a radical change. And this is going to be the subject matter of my talk today. How did this happen?

    As Devendra Swaroop ji said, and as Swamiji in his own spiritualised exposition also said, this movement is not merely to build a temple. Its reach, its vision and its depth go beyond the temple. It was aimed at the reassertion of Dharma in the society. It is to undo the wrongs, the distortions and the humiliations that this great civilization has undergone for centuries now. It is not a small affair. How did this movement evolve? How did this change the polity of this country. I think we are still in transition. The entire confusion about the purpose of this movement, the emergence of caste-based politics, all this, in my opinion, is the process of transition being undergone by the Hindu society. We should not think that the polity is being fragmented or that the country is in difficulties, no. This country has immense capacity to change itself and what is incubating today is the great future. And I will relate it to not only the developments within our country but also the collateral changes happening around the world, in which the great tradition of India and our Sadhus and Sanyasis are the path-finders. Let us look at what happened in this country since Independence. What powered India to freedom, the movers of the freedom movement, what happened to them?

    The great Vande Mataram of Bankim Chandra,, Sanatana Dharma which Maharishi Aurobindo set out as being the goal and the content and the direction of this country and its very soul, the idea of Rama Rajya which Mahatma Gandhi set out as the objective of the freedom movement, the idea of spiritual nationalism articulated by Swami Vivekananda, and the simple Ganapathy festival which Balagangadhar Tilak started to trigger the people of Maharashtra to unite and to participate in the freedom movement as a united force, these were the moving sentiments, philosophy and thoughts of the freedom movement, not secularism. No one had heard of secularism during the freedom movement. The word was unknown to India. India knew Dharma. Even the travelogues written by foreign Christian missionaries, by European travelers and scholars say that there was only one word that everyone in India in every nook and corner of the country had in common and understood, and that was Dharma. The elite could explain it, the ordinary could follow it. Dharma was internalised by every individual. It defined his family life, his relationship with his relatives, friends and neighbours. And all that inspired the freedom movement became anathema for the intellectuals in the post-independence period. If Swami Vivekananda were to deliver a speech in the Parliament about Hindu nationalism, he would be called communalist.if maharishi Aurobindo were alive today and were he to say that Sanatana Dharma is the soul of India, what would he be called? If Bankim Chandra were to know somehow that the Vande Mataram which inspired young men between the ages of 16 and 30 to willingly go to the gallows, the same Vande Mataram is today not acceptable as a national song to the Muslims and the secularists of this country, what would he feel? If Mahatma Gandhi were to be in our midst today he would have been told that the desire for Ramrajya is anti-secular and communal by the political parties, the intellectuals and the elite of India. So all those thoughts and ideas and sentiments which drove the freedom movement were first marginalised and eventually driven out of public spaces. It was no longer politically correct to talk about Vande Mataram, Ramarajya or Sanatana Dharma or Hinduism.

    It was the marginalising of these thoughts and sentiments and ideas that caused the derailment of the Indian mind and the psyche. And this was done, not by the colonial administration, it was done by our own leadership. Today, in this article that I read this lawyer has written that it was undeniable that the Muslims of India have been treated as ballot papers. It is a derogatory term but that is the truth of the political climate in this country. It is fortunate that the Hindus have not yet become ballot papers but the day is not far off because it is only when the Hindus constitute themselves into a powerful vote bank that the distortions that have arisen of the Muslim vote bank, can be corrected. So in the post independence period, the spirit of the freedom movement was distorted by perverted secularism. The loaded secularism of Pandit Nehru became pseudo secularism of Mrs. Gandhi and it became even more perverted and even more pseudo as time progressed until it reached its peak when V.P.Singh became the Prime Minister of India.

    I have seen V.P.Singh at very close quarters. The last time I saw him was on 17th October, 1990. Even as early as 1990, I know V.P.Singh had been advised to pass the ordinance acquiring this land in Ayodhya around the disputed site. He had also been advised to refer the question of whether there existed a Hindu temple or religious structure on the site before the mosque was raised, to the Supreme Court. I explained the advantages of doing both to five ministers in his cabinet. The cabinet ultimately agreed to pass the ordinance acquiring the land and also to refer the dispute over the land to the Supreme Court. The President Shri R.Venkataraman was woken up at 11.30 in the evening and he signed the Ordinance but at 4.30 in the morning, the Ordinance was withdrawn. This ordinance was re-issued by the Narasimha Rao government.

    Radha mentioned in the introduction that the Supreme Court will never deliver a judgement on the disputed site which will favour one community over the other, in whichever community’s favour the judgement may be. Why speak of litigation between Hindus and Muslims. Let us see how the polity has responded to a judgement to a litigation between the Shias and Sunnis. The case was as follows: the Sunnis of varanasi buried their dead in a burial ground belonging to the Shias with the complicity of the Varanasi Municipal Corporation. The Shias filed a writ before the Allahabad High Court demanding that the Sunnis be asked to stop burying their dead in their ground and also to remove the existing tombs. I do not remember how the Allahabad High Court ruled in the case but the case soon went up to the Supreme Court and I remember it was Justice Tulsapurkar in the bench, he ordered the Varanasi Municipal Corporation to clear the Shia burial ground of all Sunni tombs. The Varanasi Municipal Corporation refused to comply with the Supreme Court order, fearing a backlash from the Sunni Muslims. When the Municipal Corporation refused to act on the orders of the Apex Court, the Shias filed a contempt petition before the Supreme Court. When the case came up for hearing, both the Varanasi Municipal Corporation and the UP state government pleaded helplessness in complying with the orders and the central government therefore had to file an affidavit in the Supreme Court requested it to stay its own orders. The Supreme Court stayed its own orders for the next ten years. This was in 1986. There have been any number of instances when orders of the Supreme Court have been flouted, overturned and stayed. And yet, all our intellectuals, all political parties, all seculars want the VHP alone to abide by the Supreme Court Order to maintain status quo on the disputed site! And these are the people who are asking for the Ramajanmabhoomi issue to be settled by the courts. Let us assume it is decided that the place should be handed over to the Hindus. If the ISI so decides, it can trigger and and fan the flames of communal riots and large-scale violence. It can set the country on fire. Which government can execute this decision? The ISA can set Coimbatore on fire, the ISI can set Aligarh on fire.

    Speaking of Aligarh let me tell you of yet another Supreme Court order which was not only flouted but overturned too. In the year 1966, the Supreme Court delivered its most famous judgement, declaring Aligarh University to be not a Muslim university. It is not a minority institution said the Apex Court, in what I consider to be a brilliant decision; and the person who wrote the judgement was none other than Justice Hidayatullah who would later be elected as India’s Vice-President. What did the government do? It passed a law, a special law, declaring Aligarh University to be a minority institution. What happened to the Supreme Court order then? It was consigned to the trash can and no one knows about it. What was the fate of the Muslim Women’s Bill aimed at protecting the rights of Muslim women who have been summarily divorced by the triple Talaq? The Bill was intended to provide the divorced woman with financial support, with compensation or alimony. The Muslim law says support money is for the duration of three months only, the Supreme Court said such a law was unfair to women who find themselves suddenly and unilaterally divorced one day. The Supreme Court also declared that Muslims are subject to the rules in criminal law of the land. The offence of not providing support money to a divorced wife is a criminal offence and the Muslims cannot take shelter behind the Muslim Personal Law, the Supreme Court held. The Muslims have the right to live by their personal law only in matters of civil law, but the criminal law is applicable to all.

    The Supreme Court therefore ordered the husband of Shah Bano, a poor elderly Muslim woman who had been summarily divorced, to pay her lifetime adequate compensation. The country was set on fire after the judgement – riots after riots in Aligarh, in Lucknow, in Kanpur, in Allahabad, in Hyderabad. The central government once again had to pass a special law to overrule the Supreme Court judgement. These are the political parties, these are the leaders who are asking the Hindus to obey the interim orders on the disputed site. These are interim orders mind you. The courts have not dared to settle the dispute since 1885, for more than a century! The first case was filed not in 1950 but in 1885 by the Hindus for recovery of the Ramajnamabhoomi. So perverted secularism is the target of the Ayodhya movement. Secularism as a convenient political ideology has completely defaced and defiled India and destroyed our psyche and reduced us to a state where we do not have a character or personality of our own. The consciousness of this country, the ‘chittha’ of this country began manifesting itself through the Ramajanmabhoomi movement. When this movement was started, what were the epithets thrown at us, at this movement? Secular party after secular party would say that this movement is an anti-national movement, this is not what Rama would have wanted and many historians went to the extent of saying what a tolerant man Babar was and several wonderful things about Babar began to be written by the secular brigade in academia.

    There is a manuscript called the ‘Babarnama’ written by Babar’s own courtiers and there are references in it to Babar’s hostility towards Hindus and how he has had several Hindu temples destroyed. Now the same secular brigade is questioning the authenticity of the Babarnama and has pronounced the manuscript to be phony, and that it is a forgery. The same argument again. There are authentic historical documents from the court of Aurangazeb too. Aurangazeb says, in this month of Ramadan, there are three places of worship very dear to the Hindus – kashi, mathura and Ayodhya. Ayodhya has been taken care of. Destroy the other two, are the written orders of Aurangazeb and it is recorded. Its authenticity cannot be questioned by the secularists and they haven’t questioned it so far. Do you all know how the destruction of these two holy shrines took place?

    In Mathura they broke the murti of Bhagawan Krishna into pieces, slaughtered forty cows, and mixed up the flesh of the slaughtered cows with the pieces of the broken idol of Krishna and put into sacks. Two sacks of this act of religious bigotry and violence was sent to Mecca, two sacks sent to Baghdad and some pieces of the broken idol and the flesh of the cows was strewn in the Jamma Masjid for the Muslim faithful to step on and urinate upon. This is how Hindu Gods were dealt with by more than one Muslim invader king. What is it that the Hindus want? Not revenge, but the return of those sites so that the temples can be rebuilt on the site again. There are huge mosques in Varanasi and mathura, on the exact spot where our temples had stood. The Muslims and the seculars want proof in Ayodhya. There is irrefutable proof, existing proof, historical proof for Kasi and Mathura. So why don’t they give us back those sites?

    The Ramajanmabhoomi movement was begun to awaken the Hindu society and to correct the distortions in Indian polity. And I will say, the polity has begun to change now. Secularism in India is a sunset ideology and unless the political parties, the intellectuals, secularists and the political leaders understand the situation in which the Hindus are being placed today, my only worry after the 6th December 1992 is that the Hindus are becoming like the Muslims. This should worry the political and the intellectual class too. This growing trend does not auger well for the Muslims, for the Hindus and for the country. The first ever Islamic act of the Hindus was on the 6th December, 1992. The second Islamic act of the Hindus was the reaction to Godhra in Gujarat. These are matters for concern, worry and introspection. If Hindus cease to be Hindus, there won’t be any hinduism left. This is therefore an issue which has to be addressed by every section in India. If this fight, and it is not a fight between the Hindus and Muslims, it is a fight between Hindus and secularists, it is between Hinduism and pseudo secularism, if this fight had been left to the Hindus and Muslims to resolve it between themselves, it would have been resolved long ago. It is because the advocates of the Muslims, the secularists have a vested interest in the dispute continuing unresolved that the case has dragged on for over a century now. And it is because of this enormous secular interest that has clouded the case that even when the issue comes up before the Supreme Court, the judges, as Radha said, keep on pontificating about how the Hindus should behave. The Supreme Court however made one good observation, though I disagree with some aspects of Radha’s presentation, it is the majority judgement which makes some sense of the nonsense of the law passed by the Narasimha Rao government acquiring the land in Ayodhya. The majority judgement gives some meaning to the law. In one place, the judge rendering the majority judgement lists the persons who appeared on behalf of the Muslims. He said we are happy that all those who argued the case on behalf of the Muslims, belong to faiths other than Islam. But what he did not say was that only Hindus argued for Hindus. The point here is that taking the Muslim side has become the symbol of secularism and therefore even the Babri Masjid has become a symbol of secularism even though the truth is that it is a symbol of religious bigotry and vandalism.

    The fashion is to refer to it as the ‘disputed structure’. Arun Shourie told me not to call it a disputed structure. He used to say the karsevaks did not pull down a disputed structure, they pulled down a humiliating symbol of the invaders. And it was not Arun Shourie who called the mosques in Ayodhya, Kasi and Mathura humiliating symbols, it was Arnold Toynbee who called them so. Toynbee remarked that these mosques were symbols of political, religious domination over India. They are humiliating symbols and he said, that these would have been removed in any country. Not the humiliating symbols of the Muslim invaders alone, he said the same thing of the symbols of colonial rule. He remarked that in the interest of continuing good relations between both countries, he would advise the British government to request the Indian government to remove those offending symbols of the Raj.

    But the English educated in India like to see the statues of Thomas Munroe, King George V and Queen Victoria looming over us still. Because we have not really asserted ourselves. This assertion has not happened because the Indian elite, the English educated in India, the middle and upper classes have not been emotionally motivated about India. Many of them have a boarding and lodging culture towards India. And this the bane of this country. This has to change and only the great and noble souls like Pujya Swamijis can bring about this change. I have lost faith in politicians to set such an example not because the politicians are bad themselves but because they are prisoners of secular India. There is a tussle between secular India and religious India. When I say religious India I mean Hindu religious India because Islamic India is protected by, defended by secularism while Hindu religious India is unprotected, undefended. A constitutional expert is seated in our midst today. The Indian Constitution is secular, everyone will agree. Secularism protects the minorities, everyone will agree to that too. So the silly logic is the Constitution protects only the minorities. Silly but true! God is love, love is blind, so God is blind. This is how the mind and system and polity of India has been distorted. The Ramajanmabhoomimovement cannot be led by politicians. Because to them is not a matter of faith, it is a matter of expediency. A Union Minister in the central government remarked that the movement is no longer relevant and that it is an encashed cheque. She can say that now shamelessly because she is sitting where she is because it delivered the votes that put her there. It is indeed an encashed cheque for some politicians.

    But fortunately for us the movement is led not by politicians like this Union Minister, but by greater souls who have a vision for this nation. This movement will be a corrective to the distortions in our polity; the people of India have been yearning for such a lead. Important segments of our intellectuals have to be converted to this view and I plead with our Pujya Swamijis to convert these minds from every city and town of this nation. Thank You.

    Entire meeting transcripts.

    1. satish k kapoor

      I only have to bless you for what you have written. May the likes of you grow. All the facts you refer to are not known because the English press is biased. SHAME ON ROMILA THAPARS>SHARMA AND OTHER COMMUNIST_SECULARIST<ANTI_HINDU FAKE SCHOLARS FOR PRESENTING FACTS IN A WRONG WAY TO ATTAIN HIGH POSITION. Touchwood

      1. arisebharat Post author

        dhanyavaad..it is blessings like people like you that gives us the strength to keep going forward.. Satyameva Jayate

  9. Vijay Simha

    Thanks for the post, Here is some some on Court Case History:
    Built in 1528 by Mir Baqi and known till the 1940s as Masjid-i-Janmasthan, the Babri Masjid-Ramjanambhoomi disputed structure was demolished by a marauding mob on December 6, 1992. The sound of its loud crash, etched in the memory of many, could potentially reverberate again after the Allahabad high court decides the title suits filed by both Hindus and Muslims claiming ownership over the land on which the structure once stood.

    Babri Masjid was also known for its acoustics.Graham Pickford, who was an architect for Lord William Bentick (1828-1833), had said, “A whisper from the Babri Masjid Mihrab could be heard at the other end, 100 feet away, and throughout the length and breadth of the central court.” It had a miracle well, whose water was revered both by Hindus and Muslims for its cool sweetness and for its disease curing powers, all recorded in the District Gazetteer of Faizabad (DGF).

    The Mutiny of 1857 probably changed it all. The DGF says, “Up to this time (1855), both Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building. But since the Mutiny (1857), an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the Masjid and the Hindus, forbidden access to the inner yard, make the offering on a platform (chabootra), which they have raised in the outer one.”

    The other turning point was the night of December 22-23, 1949. As per the FIR lodged by sub-inspector Ram Dube of Ayodhya police station, a group of 50-60 people stealthily placed the idols of Ram and Sita in the central dome of the Masjid at night. A furious Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru asked Uttar Pradesh chief minister G B Pant to take steps to immediately remove the idols. But district magistrate K K Nair, fearing retaliation from Hindus, pleaded inability to carry out the orders. The later sequence of events are vividly projected by the Supreme Court in its judgment in Ismail Faruqui vs Union of India [1994 SCC (6) 360]. In 1950, two suits were filed by some Hindus; in one of these suits, in January 1950, the trial court passed interim orders whereby the idols remained at the place where they were installed in December 1949. The main premises were locked, not allowing devotees inside.

    The high court confirmed the interim order in 1955. If Nirmohi Akhara filed a suit claiming title over the disputed structure in 1959, the Sunni Central Wakf Board followed suit in 1961. In 1989, another title suit was filed. On February 1, 1986, a decision by the Rajiv Gandhi government and order by the district magistrate saw the locks opened and the place, hitherto permitted for entry to a priest once a year for an yearly puja, was thrown open to devotees.

    What followed in quick succession before the 1992 demolition of the disputed structure were a series of breaches of status quo orders by the high court and solemn assurances by Uttar Pradesh government and its chief minister Kalyan Singh to protect the structure.

    The central government, through an ordinance that was later converted into the “Acquisition ofCertain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993”, took over the entire area, including the spot where the disputed structure once stood. The entire land measured 67.703 acres in village Kot Ramchandra in Faizabad.

    The Supreme Court upheld the acquisition, which probably helped in calming the volatile situation prevailing in Ayodhya but its splinters engulfed India through catastrophic riots in Mumbai and other places altering
    the sensitive equation between the two communities. But it struck down Section 4(3) of the act.

  10. arisebharat Post author

    For the time being even if we keep religious belief’s aside, Rama is a national hero accepted by the Indian constitution as a hero. A temple that is dedicated to him should be the wish of every Indian, irrespective of his religious belief. Isn’t it strange that people who seem to want “India growing” cannot accept the simple fact that Babur was an invader who ordered demolition of the temple of Rama to prove his supremacy; By preferring a national hero’s temple over an invader’s symbol what is the message that they are trying to drive ?

  11. zeeshan

    To keep India growing, we have to come up and think above this “Mandir-Mashjid” issues. If you are true hindu or true muslim you should think about peace not about reconstruction or demolition of someone’s place of worship.

    1. Skanda

      Really, Zeeshan? Did you forget teaching this “integration theme” to the Bangla Muslims and Kashmiri Muslims?

      Did you think that you can achieve “peace” by depriving one section of people of their lands, places of worship, by grabbing their funds?

      Honesty first, is required to achieve any good result. The aggressor should first apologize, return what he has vandalized to those who have been wronged. It is by being honest, by correcting one’s mistakes that you can gain the trust of people, without which there can be no dream of peace or coexistence.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s