Babri Mosque, Lahore Gurdwara: Legal parallels, different outcome

[Thamizh Puli]

All mosques are sacred for Muslims. So you need to understand that before you start claiming that there are 1000s of mosques so this one can be destroyed and desecrated.

The issue is that you cannot prove that it is the birthplace of your god. The supreme court in India is a sham. If public opinion says tomorrow for some reason that your house should be destroyed and people should come and destroy your house.. Will you want the supreme court to give a neutral judgment or one based on public opinion?

Ok, let me explain in a way perhaps you can understand. The temple is more sacred to Hindus, so when you destroy temples to build mosques, you can get away with it under muslim rule but once that goes away, the stronger party, in this case the Hindus, come and take over. Happy?

as to Supreme Court of India being sham, it shouldn't matter to you just like you don't matter to them.

Let me correct you *billions of cases

Look everyone, at a fine specimen of a facist.

what are you on about?

 

[cocomo]

It wasn't about a mosque and a temple but rather the birth place of the Hindu God Rama.

Hindustani court in its verdict refused this claim because of lack of evidence. So it is ultimately about Hindus building a temple over a Mosque rather than a Mosque being built over an Idol temple.

 

[Thamizh Puli]

Hindustani court in its verdict refused this claim because of lack of evidence. So it is ultimately about Hindus building a temple over a Mosque rather than a Mosque being built over an Idol temple.

incorrect. Here is the exact test of the relief from Supreme Court of India:

"170. It is thus concluded on the conclusion that faith and belief of Hindus since prior to construction of Mosque and subsequent thereto has always been that Janmaasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed which faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence discussed above."

 

[xeuss]

incorrect. Here is the exact test of the relief from Supreme Court of India:

"170. It is thus concluded on the conclusion that faith and belief of Hindus since prior to construction of Mosque and subsequent thereto has always been that Janmaasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed which faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence discussed above."

The court's judgement is based on fictitious grounds. The conclusion it comes to is not supported by the evidence it marshalls.

 

[M.Bison]

Ok, let me explain in a way perhaps you can understand. The temple is more sacred to Hindus, so when you destroy temples to build mosques, you can get away with it under muslim rule but once that goes away, the stronger party, in this case the Hindus, come and take over. Happy?

What proof do you have that Muslims destroyed a temple to build a mosque in that spot let alone Ram's temple?
You keep saying that it is the most sacred temple to Hindus but there is no proof that there was even a temple there. Don't spread bullshit here.
The Hindus are not strong and never were. The British came and unified Hindustan and you couldn't do it for +1000 years what makes you think you will keep it unified? The only thing you can do is rape and pillage the innocent and once someone fights back then you say that the tea is fantastic. Look at how many people you have stationed in Kashmir alone. Give me a break.. Stupid ***.

as to Supreme Court of India being sham, it shouldn't matter to you just like you don't matter to them.

Sounds like you have started to cry a little..

If you want to use this type of logic, then why are you here?

This is a Pakistani forum with Pakistani people what are you doing here? Don't give your opinions here. GTFO, it's that simple. No one is keeping you here.
Just like how you lived in peace for 1000s of years under Muslim rule. Shudras like you had some say under the Muslims just like that we are allowing you to spew nonsense on this forum.

This is not a bjp forum where rats like you become Shakthi mans..

incorrect. Here is the exact test of the relief from Supreme Court of India:

"170. It is thus concluded on the conclusion that faith and belief of Hindus since prior to construction of Mosque and subsequent thereto has always been that Janmaasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed which faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence discussed above."

Whos oral evidence? the Hindus, Buddhists or the Jains?

A nation of lying people will produce Justices that also take faith and belief as testimony. Only in India.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

incorrect. Here is the exact test of the relief from Supreme Court of India:

"170. It is thus concluded on the conclusion that faith and belief of Hindus since prior to construction of Mosque and subsequent thereto has always been that Janmaasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed which faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence discussed above."

Err hang on. Do you speak English or are you deliberately misinterpreting this point under a cloud of obfuscation?

The statement infers that the court agreed that it is proven that this is a BELIEF and the FAITH of Hindus. ...not that it is proven that Ram was born there.

Stop inventing your own interpretation of the court's judgment.

It's quite funny how you chose to interpret that, like many other bhakts undoubtedly did too. How can ANY court or ANY archaeologist prove Ram was born anywhere???

Do you actually think before spewing trash?

The court simply agreed on what the beliefs and faith of Hindus were.

 

[M.Bison]

Err hang on. Do you speak English or are you deliberately misinterpreting this point under a cloud of obfuscation?

The statement infers that the court agreed that it is proven that this is a BELIEF and the FAITH of Hindus. ...not that it is proven that Ram was born there.

Stop inventing your own interpretation of the court's judgment.

It's quite funny how you chose to interpret that, like many other bhakts undoubtedly did too. How can ANY court or ANY archaeologist prove Ram was born anywhere???

Do you actually think before spewing trash?

The court simply agreed on what the beliefs and faith of Hindus were.

he is a rat pretending to be a hindu liberal..

 

[Thamizh Puli]

The court's judgement is based on fictitious grounds. The conclusion it comes to is not supported by the evidence it marshalls.

you are entitled to your opinion on how the court arrived at its conclusions. I am simply pointing out what the court wrote in its judgement.

Err hang on. Do you speak English or are you deliberately misinterpreting this point under a cloud of obfuscation?

The statement infers that the court agreed that it is proven that this is a BELIEF and the FAITH of Hindus. ...not that it is proven that Ram was born there.

Stop inventing your own interpretation of the court's judgment.

It's quite funny how you chose to interpret that, like many other bhakts undoubtedly did too. How can ANY court or ANY archaeologist prove Ram was born anywhere???

Do you actually think before spewing trash?

The court simply agreed on what the beliefs and faith of Hindus were.

huh? what are religions and gods but matters of faith and belief? does Jesus have a birth certificate, does a video exist of Mohamed receiving revelations? put aside your colored glass and read that paragraph from the judgement.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

you are entitled to your opinion on how the court arrived at its conclusions. I am simply pointing out what the court wrote in its judgement.



huh? what are religions and gods but matters of faith and belief? does Jesus have a birth certificate, does a video exist of Mohamed receiving revelations? put aside your colored glass and read that paragraph from the judgement.

Yes, so where is your proof that Ram was born there? Secondly, where did the SC state that they have decided that they agree that Ram was born there?

This is why the poster you originally responded to was correct. The SC's ultimate judgement is not based on whether it was right or wrong for a mosque to be built at Ram's birthplace (because that cannot be proved in a court of law). Rather the SC has judged whether it was right or wrong for a temple to be built on the ruins of a violently ransacked mosque where defenders of said mosque were murdered, which MAY or may NOT have been built on a pre-existing temple. There is certainly no proof beyond reasonable doubt of Ram's birth there. There is not even proof beyond reasonable doubt of a Hindu temple being destroyed and built over by a mosque. So this kangaroo court has boiled it down to Muslim vs Hindu and ruled in favour of Hindu on every count.

 

[Arsalan 345]

A great man once said "Walk softly and carry a big stick"

Pakistan has shown the world we are a peace loving people, and we have shown India we make Fantastic Tea.

you are that kid in the playground that wants to pick a fight with everyone for no reason.

France and Germany once hated each other so much and fought so many wars. Now you can go from France to Russia in your own car.

Goal is not piss yourself fighting everyone, goal is to get mutual peace and development.

My question is why we witness black day,Kashmir day if we want peace in the region? Why cry for Kashmir if you want to abandon it? Things that you have said above never happened between India and pakistan.you know indian nature.we have examples like 71 and siachen.what we have today? A small part of Kashmir and India annexed it's part publicly without any problems.you can't stay silent when you have valid reason to fight for a disputed land.now this kartarpur! I mean Sikhs are in indian army.they will never change loyalties.i have listened sidhu speech.i feel that he was briefed by modi before he came here.look at all his kind requests.first kartarpur,now he wants no borders and trade with Uzbekistan through pakistan.do you know what he said? This is actually intention of Indian government.i don't understand pm Khan.kashmir still under curfew and they don't have right to take unilateral decisions on Kashmir but they are doing things publicly and look at us! We are rebuilding temples,providing passage to people who killed us during independence.pm Khan wants peace even if we lost disputed land.i mean what kind of peace efforts are these? This is like acknowledging indian actions and it's pathetic.i agree when you say pakistan wants peace but this is too much peace to handle.

 

[Thamizh Puli]

Yes, so where is your proof that Ram was born there? Secondly, where did the SC state that they have decided that they agree that Ram was born there?

This is why the poster you originally responded to was correct. The SC's ultimate judgement is not based on whether it was right or wrong for a mosque to be built at Ram's birthplace (because that cannot be proved in a court of law). Rather the SC has judged whether it was right or wrong for a temple to be built on the ruins of a violently ransacked mosque where defenders of said mosque were murdered, which MAY or may NOT have been built on a pre-existing temple. There is certainly no proof beyond reasonable doubt of Ram's birth there. There is not even proof beyond reasonable doubt of a Hindu temple being destroyed and built over by a mosque. So this kangaroo court has boiled it down to Muslim vs Hindu and ruled in favour of Hindu on every count.

you have it all upside down. I already quoted the exact language of the judgement. You come here and disagree with that text and tr to say that's not what the case was about. Why do you think you know better about the case than the judges that heard it?

You think that because you are biased. plain and simple.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

you have it all upside down. I already quoted the exact language of the judgement. You come here and disagree with that text and tr to say that's not what the case was about. Why do you think you know better about the case than the judges that heard it?

You think that because you are biased. plain and simple.

Lolz. You keep telling yourself that if it helps soothe your illiteracy diarrhoea.

I don't "disagree with the text" because according to you yourself (and I have since checked), that is the wording used.

I disagree with your interpretation of the text.

I am merely interpreting the court's statement. I am not judging the evidence myself. If the court has declared that it cannot decide on all the following: whether the temple was Ram's birthplace, whether it was a temple that was destroyed by Muslims, whether it was built over by the Muslims who purportedly destroyed it...then how can you or I or anyone? And how can a further decision be made on the basis of these things which become mere presumptions?

The court said they merely recognised the articles of faith that the Hindus BELIEVE IN with regards to this site. The court did NOT say there is real world proof beyond reasonable doubt of those articles.

 

[TMA]

A great man once said "Walk softly and carry a big stick"

Pakistan has shown the world we are a peace loving people, and we have shown India we make Fantastic Tea.

you are that kid in the playground that wants to pick a fight with everyone for no reason.

France and Germany once hated each other so much and fought so many wars. Now you can go from France to Russia in your own car.

Goal is not piss yourself fighting everyone, goal is to get mutual peace and development.

Although the reason that France and Germany are friends is that one of them suffered a Total Defeat in war about 75 years ago. I hope this is not what it takes for Pakistan and Bharat to have such a friendship.

 

[Vapnope]

The presence of Ram Mandir is based on.... mythology.

The people who think that present day Indian muslims are responsible for the bloodshed centuries ago, will not sit down idly after this episode. They will claim any mosque or any muslim heritage site as some demolished temple and would destroy it. This is beginning of the end for the Muslims in India.

 

[Thamizh Puli]

Lolz. You keep telling yourself that if it helps soothe your illiteracy diarrhoea.

I don't "disagree with the text" because according to you yourself (and I have since checked), that is the wording used.

I disagree with your interpretation of the text.

I am merely interpreting the court's statement. I am not judging the evidence myself. If the court has declared that it cannot decide on all the following: whether the temple was Ram's birthplace, whether it was a temple that was destroyed by Muslims, whether it was built over by the Muslims who purportedly destroyed it...then how can you or I or anyone? And how can a further decision be made on the basis of these things which become mere presumptions?

The court said they merely recognised the articles of faith that the Hindus BELIEVE IN with regards to this site. The court did NOT say there is real world proof beyond reasonable doubt of those articles.

so what you have is not a reading problem but one of comprehension.