Plot to kill Ayodhya judges busted: Chidambaram

[S.A.T.A]

@Bangalorean

If the dispute was merely over piece of real estate,then amicable settlement would have been justified.We are quite aware it isn't,its about a religious space sacred for the Hindu community.The solution should not be one that rubs salt into festering wounds.There is place and significance for everything,a hospital or school is not where a devout Hindu can go for spiritual nourishment,the temple represents to a Hindu seeking spiritual solace, what the hospital is to a physically ailing.

One of the enshrined ideals of secularism as we understand in India is not deny a person the right to practice his religious with fear or intimidation.To deny the Hindus the right to consecrate the idol of Lord Rama at the place which Hindu traditions identify his birth place,build a temple according to traditional precepts and make it available to devout Hindus to visit it and pay obeisance,tantamount to denying the Hindus his right practice his religion.

A 'secular' solution in this case i'm afraid will only brush the issue under the carpet,will not go away,we already know what the consequence could be if the issue is kept in suspense.The ideal solution would have been to dismantle the Mosque, as immaculately as current engineering expertise would allow,and trans locate to a site acceptable to Muslims.Since now the structure stands demolished,whatever can be salvaged from the old mosque can be used to put together the mosque elsewhere.

 

[Drona]

lol even the aryans were aliens to India. just because they happened to come few centuries earlier doesn't make them native.

according to your analogy everyone in India came from outside except adivasis since they were the first to settle in land mass known as India.

You still believe in Aryan invasion theory came out of Racist imperial mind ! Aryan invasion theory has been debunked, with scientific and genetic proofs. Indian population is indigenous and not migrated from somewhere else. plz ee this GENETICS AND THE ARYAN DEBATE By Michel Danino
little lengthy review so just posting a conclusion,

For me and for Toomas Kivisild, South Asia is logically the ultimate origin of M17 and his ancestors; and sure enough we find the highest rates and greatest diversity of the M17 line in Pakistan, India, and eastern Iran, and low rates in the Caucasus. M17 is not only more diverse in South Asia than in Central Asia, but diversity characterizes its presence in isolated tribal groups in the south, thus undermining any theory of M17 as a marker of a 'male Aryan invasion' of India. One average estimate for the origin of this line in India is as much as 51,000 years. All this suggests that M17 could have found his way initially from India or Pakistan, through Kashmir, then via Central Asia and Russia, before finally coming into Europe."25



We will not call it, of course, an "Indian invasion" of Europe; in simple terms, India acted "as an incubator of early genetic differentiation of modern humans moving out of Africa."26

Genetics is a fast-evolving discipline, and the studies quoted above are certainly not the last word; but they have laid the basis for a wholly different perspective of Indian populations, and it is most unlikely that we will have to abandon it to return to the crude racial nineteenth-century fallacies of Aryan invaders and Dravidian autochthons. Neither have any reality in genetic terms, just as they have no reality in archaeological or cultural terms. In this sense, genetics is joining other disciplines in helping to clean the cobwebs of colonial historiography. If some have a vested interest in patching together the said cobwebs so they may keep cluttering our history textbooks, they are only delaying the inevitable.
*

 

[Rahul Singh]

An analogy.

Say I buy a piece of land with an old house on it. Destroy the old house and build a new one. Can the old owner come and ask me why I destroyed the old house? No.

For arguments sake (since I do not have much knowledge about religious issues), let's assume Muslim invaders destroyed the Temple and built a Mosque over it. In those days, conquering a land meant ownership of the land. Can Hindus now claim all land as theirs?

If we go by history, then Hindus have already lost the land centuries ago.

This is a sensitive issue and should be handled in a way in which both communities engage and accept the ruling. There would still be some dis-satisfaction, but whatever the Apex court rules, should be accepted by both the communities.

Great analogy! Let me have a take. The Britishers followed Mulims and threw them out to toilet. So they became the owner and when they freed India the Indians became the owner who using present legal system filled a suit and won the ownership. So they had the right to claim and they won it back legally (of course as per present system which was obviously not anarchical like one existed during Pig Rule).

Besides, If your analogy goes any further then back in time Indians were bunch of idiots/criminals because they were asking Britishers to leave and M K Gandhi was champion of all.

 

[johnee]

^^ You are right in that Amicable solutions need not be just solutions. But in our nation at present, we do not have much choice. Amicable solutions are more important than just solutions, IMHO. After seeing all the debates, discussions and strong views about this, I think Oracle's solution is the best. Don't give the land to anyone, make out a case that both parties are on legally weak ground. And build a "secular" structure there. Hospital, or school, or even just a skyscraper!

Wow!!
But the point you missed is that the place is significant for the Hindus. Thats the reason the issue is alive. Your solution is no solution at all. It only seeks to wish away a real issue. Issues have to be addressed.

 

[Oracle]

Great analogy! Let me have a take. The Britishers followed Mulims and threw them out to toilet. So they became the owner and when they freed India the Indians became the owner who using present legal system filled a suit and won the ownership. So they had the right to claim and they won it back legally (of course as per present system which was obviously not anarchical like one existed during Pig Rule).

Correct. In the Indians you mentioned, Muslims too are a part.

Besides, If your analogy goes any further then back in time Indians were bunch of idiots/criminals because they were asking Britishers to leave and M K Gandhi was champion of all.

That is an assumption. Your assumption.

 

[Iamanidiot]

I really hate these powder keg threads.I really even doubt this news

 

[Rahul Singh]

Correct. In the Indians you mentioned, Muslims too are a part.

That is a fact, another is people taking pride in barbarism of invaders were defeated in court. Proven wrong, if you will.

That is an assumption. Your assumption.

A counter assumption, to be precise.

 

[johnee]

I really hate these powder keg threads.I really even doubt this news

Actually, we have deviated from the topic. The topic was not about Ayodhya and its solutions. It was a thread about SIMI's plans to kill the judges. Infact, Yusuf has already said that there is another thread for this discussion. It is useless to discuss these things anyway. We all have our opinions, but the matter is in the court. Lets the courts give a verdict, then we can discuss.

Till, then we should all stick to the topic here.

 

[KS]

lol even the aryans were aliens to India. just because they happened to come few centuries earlier doesn't make them native.

according to your analogy everyone in India came from outside except adivasis since they were the first to settle in land mass known as India.

The AIT has been prove wrong and just a hoax by the English historians who wanted to justify their ruling of India.

It has been discussed plenty of times before to open that again.

 

[The Messiah]

The AIT has been prove wrong and just a hoax by the English historians who wanted to justify their ruling of India.

It has been discussed plenty of times before to open that again.

Before jumping to conclusions i suggest you read what ive written. have i said aryans invaded India ? No.

They come from outside India ? Yes
Were adivasis the first inhabitants ? Yes
Were aryans the original inhabitants ? No

 

[The Messiah]

You still believe in Aryan invasion theory came out of Racist imperial mind ! Aryan invasion theory has been debunked, with scientific and genetic proofs. Indian population is indigenous and not migrated from somewhere else. plz ee this GENETICS AND THE ARYAN DEBATE By Michel Danino
little lengthy review so just posting a conclusion,

man came out of africa and spread out. man first came to middle east then India...another branch from middle east went north towards central asia and europe. i dont believe emotional bollocks whether it be from west or are own Indian. Fact is FACT!

first group to arrive in India were tribals/adivasis and anyone after them are outsiders (including myself).

 

[Singh]

Chidu is trying to deflect attention. There are 100s of plots that are busted every week, why doesn't he chose to make them public ?
I don't think he did a smart thing by making public this information. Cheap political point-scoring.

 

[KS]

Before jumping to conclusions i suggest you read what ive written. have i said aryans invaded India ? No.

They come from outside India ? Yes
Were adivasis the first inhabitants ? Yes
Were aryans the original inhabitants ? No

By that theory no group of people in any other part of the world except those inhabiting the Upper Nile can call themselves the "Natives".

And what happened 3000 or 4000 years ago (and which has no conclusive proof) in a peaceful way cannot be compared to what happened 500 years ago in full light of recorded history and in an overtly violent way.

As I said these justifications were peddled out first by the Britisn to justify their colonial rule over India and then by the Leftists-Marxists to water down and white wash the atrocities of the invading Central Asian/Afghan/Turk/Arab invaders who happened to be Islamic.

 

[mahesh]

the plot might be true, if it is really true then don't the congress or the ruling government have the responsibility to mention it to the country?

 

[A chauhan]

man came out of africa and spread out. man first came to middle east then India...another branch from middle east went north towards central asia and europe. i dont believe emotional bollocks whether it be from west or are own Indian. Fact is FACT!

first group to arrive in India were tribals/adivasis and anyone after them are outsiders (including myself).

Lol!! come on yaar I have often seen you arguing on the same matter denying legal Hindu occupancy in India.If Hindus came here from some other place then just think what was here in India that time ? Cities? Urban areas? Or mere Forests? Don't you think Hindus developed this area from forests to present cities? isn't it sufficient to prove that this whole area belongs to Hindus? If we still mention African theory then no people of the world are original inhabitants, if Hindus are not the original inhabitants of India then Muslims are not the original inhabitants of Mecca or from wherever they are, Christians too have no connections with Jerusalem or from wherever they are, if we all have originated from Africa then why all the wars are going around the world for territories? Should we go back to Africa ? Should i go to Jerusalem,break some famous religious places, build Hindu temples there and argue that you Christians are not original inhabitants of Jerusalem you and we all are from Africa ? isn't it a stupid idea? No doubt It's an idiotic plan but sigh!! unfortunately we are seeing the same in Indian or Hindu context.

The only fact which is being considered here is that at the time of Muslim invasion, India was a Golden Bird; a very well settled, nourished and flourished Hindu area where Hindus were living for thousands of years and having their legal and religious rights to defend their possession,culture and religion from foreign invading religions and cultures and those rights were undoubtedly violated by Muslims, that's all. They ruled us it's OK, they lived here, still permissible , they broke thousands of temples here still we tolerated, but they broke Ayodhya temple which is Jerusalem/Mecca-Medina of Hinduism !! which in no way was going to be forgiven, and finally it was broken down. And for the sake of secularism Hindu rights are again being suppressed. I seriously doubt that so called "gift" of Secularism will turn into a curse for Hindus in the future.

I feel pity for those SIMI terrorists who planned such unlawful act to kill Judges of Ayodhya verdict. That land undoubtedly belongs to Hindus so I expect a judgment in favor of Hindus from the SC.

 

[The Messiah]

By that theory no group of people in any other part of the world except those inhabiting the Upper Nile can call themselves the "Natives".

And what happened 3000 or 4000 years ago (and which has no conclusive proof) in a peaceful way cannot be compared to what happened 500 years ago in full light of recorded history and in an overtly violent way.

As I said these justifications were peddled out first by the Britisn to justify their colonial rule over India and then by the Leftists-Marxists to water down and white wash the atrocities of the invading Central Asian/Afghan/Turk/Arab invaders who happened to be Islamic.

Another idiotic conclusion. Where have i justified anything ?

Why cant you stomach the fact that they weren't native to the land ?

 

[The Messiah]

Lol!! come on yaar I have often seen you arguing on the same matter denying legal Hindu occupancy in India.

Quote me anywhere on the forum where ive said India doesn't belong to hindus and i'll quit. If you cant find it will you quit ? or atleast apologize for throwing around false accusations ?

If Hindus came here from some other place then just think what was here in India that time ? Cities? Urban areas? Or mere Forests? Don't you think Hindus developed this area from forests to present cities? isn't it sufficient to prove that this whole area belongs to Hindus? If we still mention African theory then no people of the world are original inhabitants, if Hindus are not the original inhabitants of India then Muslims are not the original inhabitants of Mecca or from wherever they are, Christians too have no connections with Jerusalem or from wherever they are, if we all have originated from Africa then why all the wars are going around the world for territories? Should we go back to Africa ? Should i go to Jerusalem,break some famous religious places, build Hindu temples there and argue that you Christians are not original inhabitants of Jerusalem you and we all are from Africa ? isn't it a stupid idea? No doubt It's an idiotic plan but sigh!! unfortunately we are seeing the same in Indian or Hindu context.

There were no cities but there weren't forests either. The tribals were living then as they are living now. Do you know what the term "original inhabitants" means ? It means the first group of people to live on a piece of land. And aryans were certainly not that. Infact before the arrival of aryans there were organized cities near indus river. So you see aryans weren't even the 2ng group of people to migrate into India. If you know anything then there have been dozens of migrations into India through tens of thousands of years. Religion doesn't enter into it the equation im afraid. Hindus weren't always hindus and muslims in mecca weren't always muslims. Tomorrow if an adivasi being an original inhabitant converts to judaism then will judaism become a native religion ? No. Hinduism is Indian because it transpired in the Indian subcontinent but aryans came from outside. Even the hindu texts mention this so why cant you agree ?

The only fact which is being considered here is that at the time of Muslim invasion, India was a Golden Bird; a very well settled, nourished and flourished Hindu area where Hindus were living for thousands of years and having their legal and religious rights to defend their possession,culture and religion from foreign invading religions and cultures and those rights were undoubtedly violated by Muslims, that's all. They ruled us it's OK, they lived here, still permissible , they broke thousands of temples here still we tolerated, but they broke Ayodhya temple which is Jerusalem/Mecca-Medina of Hinduism !! which in no way was going to be forgiven, and finally it was broken down. And for the sake of secularism Hindu rights are again being suppressed. I seriously doubt that so called "gift" of Secularism will turn into a curse for Hindus in the future.

I feel pity for those SIMI terrorists who planned such unlawful act to kill Judges of Ayodhya verdict. That land undoubtedly belongs to Hindus so I expect a judgment in favor of Hindus from the SC.

Even during the times of mughals India was a golden bird...our wealth was only transferred out in mass by the english. Have i denied that muslims didn't invade ? No. I dont smudge over facts. In this forum itself ive mentioned it several times that hindu temple should be built on the very spot they want and mosque can be built in neighboring area but i bet you missed that.

 

[Drona]

man came out of africa and spread out. man first came to middle east then India...another branch from middle east went north towards central asia and europe. I dont believe emotional bollocks whether it be from west or are own Indian. Fact is FACT!

I think you didn't bother to go through the source i posted, it describes the migrations same as in the image you posted , but with more proof with better references which are broad genetic study on Indian population. It simply debunks Aryan Invasion theory which undermined the cultural heritage of indigenous population developed on their own after arrived from Africa in India where they evolved differently and far earlier than other places in world.

first group to arrive in India were tribals/adivasis and anyone after them are outsiders (including myself).

wrong logic ! If I be specific, the man/women stepped in India first is only native person, people after him would be outsider. that is laughable. Human migration out of Africa before 50,000 or earlier were as good as comparable to animal migration.
native/indigenous are those who develop the first ever culture, built the society and lived with evolving culture.

 

[The Messiah]

I think you didn't bother to go through the source i posted, it describes the migrations same as in the image you posted , but with more proof with better references which are broad genetic study on Indian population. It simply debunks Aryan Invasion theory which undermined the cultural heritage of indigenous population developed on their own after arrived from Africa in India where they evolved differently and far earlier than other places in world.

wrong logic ! If I be specific, the man/women stepped in India first is only native person, people after him would be outsider. that is laughable. Human migration out of Africa before 50,000 or earlier were as good as comparable to animal migration.
native/indigenous are those who develop the first ever culture, built the society and lived with evolving culture.

There in lies your problem because ive never prescribed to that theory.

Also its not like straight out of africa people arrived in one big lump, on the contrary dozens of migrations happened over tens of thousands of years. Tribals also developed there culture...lets not deride them if you dont believe them to be worthy

 

[mayfair]

The first group to arrive in India were dinosaurs and you go back further they were all friggin' bacteria. Humans are not the original inhabitants of anywhere except United States of bellendry. In the movie Matrix (the first one and the only one in my opinion that was worth watching), there was a very apt comment made by Smith- Human beings are like viruses, the disease of this planet.