Bangladesh: Man Defends Razing 500-Year Old Hindu Temple

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

They were afraid to disclose the names to the media cos of fear, that will already tell you how the hindus of that area felt when mian first broke down the temple.

Dude, how many times must i tell you only a commitee can decide whether to hand over a temple. The mian guy, if he is innocent, might have thought that he can get it by just dealing with chowdhury's cousin.

Only ound eurasiareview as the source so far. Need to wait for some more time.

Chowdhury's cousin taken debt from the accused person's father then why they should deal with committee even if there is any. The article states that it was a family property. So it is quite evident there were no committee.

n why they did not use the temple for long or tried to restore it and remain quite all along, needs to be investigated at first before laying blame to others.

 

[illusion8]

yes that is why a case has been filed in the police station, posted in an international indian mouth piece.

Even despite of the land grab claim, it has been said openly mr. chowdhury's cousin unable to pay the debt he had takes registered the land to this person n left country and despite knowing all these they remained silent and let the process go and play this hindu victim card.

n it is a ruin not a functional temple.

I give up, u guys are incorrigible, woe me if I try to get in some sense into you, u post the article and then go ahead to say that the hindus are conspiring to do this and that and then say its Indian propaganda by some unknown source. LOL u say its a 500 year old temple then where does single ownership of the temple come into effect. Any common place of worship is the ownership of the community. Your police say that the records state that the guy is lying and are wanting to arrest him, you create an atmosphere of communal disharmony on this thread by inciting hindu and muslim property ownership problems and then go on to claim that you are not an islamist. i am outta here

 

[Kaniska]

Itching too much? where the hell you get that captain planet is islamist? He even claims that he dated canadian indian girls.... Afraid of islamist??

Dude,,peace loving people always fear radical people...be it isalamist or Hindu...It does not matter..becaoz for them world is nothing but all about religion...

 

[Avisheik]

There is nothing fishy, many people buy properties and do development many years after purchase.
Question you should be asking why Hindus did not use the temple since 1975? They knew it was sold why they did not protest when land was sold? Obvios answer to these questions expose ill motive of these fake hue and cry.



That is not true always, given history of the region and Hindu practices many of these temples were setup in wealthy (according to stanard of that time) family property. I have seen that in our village home.



Many if not all in Hindu community today try to look down on majority population because of Awami anti Islamic stand and indian interference. We have seen how Hindu teachers were attacking Islam and our Phrophet (PBUH). None in hindu community stood up and said those were wrong.

On the matter of this land, this is pure case of Hindus sold their land moved to india and now they want land back in name of "temple". But did not care about or use the temple for who knows how many hundred years. They did not even protest when owner sold it.

I have seen Hindus done it in our village, they sold their properties and came back in opportune time to reclaim and cheat the owner. And time of Awami rgime seems to be fitting for their agenda.

Well duh, captain planet said that its a ruin, how to pray there? They didnt protest most probably because they didnt know it was sold

Set up by wealthy people, run and owned by a committee

In what way can we look down on you?? And check facebook if you think that hindus never spoke out against them.

Again only a commitee can sell a temple land, not an individual. They most probably did not hear of this deal, till the demolision. And hundred of years, means that there is historical value of the structure. The buddisht dont pray at paharpur anymore, does that mean we can destroy it?

And i have seen people illegally occupy hindu land even though they didnt move anywhere

 

[idune]

They were afraid to disclose the names to the media cos of fear, that will already tell you how the hindus of that area felt when mian first broke down the temple.

Dude, how many times must i tell you only a commitee can decide whether to hand over a temple. The mian guy, if he is innocent, might have thought that he can get it by just dealing with chowdhury's cousin.

Only ound eurasiareview as the source so far. Need to wait for some more time.

Question you should be asking why Hindus did not use the temple since 1975 and many years before then?
Hindus in the area knew it was sold why they did not protest when land was sold?
Where was Hindu committee in 1975 and why they did not protest sell of the property?

Obvious answer to these questions expose ill motive of these fake hue and cry.

Given history of the region and Hindu practices many of these temples were setup in wealthy (according to stanard of that time) family property. I have seen that in our village home. And if property owner wants to sell land where temple was, its completely legal. Again where was "hindu temple committee" in 1975 during the sell and all these years?

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

Question you should be asking why Hindus did not use the temple since 1975 and many years before then?
Hindus in the area knew it was sold why they did not protest when land was sold?
Where was Hindu committee in 1975 and why they did not protest sell of the property?

Obvious answer to these questions expose ill motive of these fake hue and cry.

Given history of the region and Hindu practices many of these temples were setup in wealthy (according to stanard of that time) family property. I have seen that in our village home. And if property owner wants to sell land where temple was, its completely legal. Again where was "hindu temple committee" in 1975 during the sell and all these years?

Avishek is trying to say they were unaware of the deal, so they were quite!!! Is it really believable. The big point is the guy sold the land as he took a big sum of money and was unable to pay it and then after registering he fled to India.

 

[Avisheik]

Chowdhury's cousin taken debt from the accused person's father then why they should deal with committee even if there is any. The article states that it was a family property. So it is quite evident there were no committee.

n why they did not use the temple for long or tried to restore it and remain quite all along, needs to be investigated at first before laying blame to others.

Cos a commitee can own a temple. An individual cant sell a temple. It doesnt matter if its family property as long as there is a temple, it belongs to the commitee.

Most probably cos there is a lack of funds. Lets wait for the investigation then.

 

[Avisheik]

Question you should be asking why Hindus did not use the temple since 1975 and many years before then?
Hindus in the area knew it was sold why they did not protest when land was sold?
Where was Hindu committee in 1975 and why they did not protest sell of the property?

Obvious answer to these questions expose ill motive of these fake hue and cry.

Given history of the region and Hindu practices many of these temples were setup in wealthy (according to stanard of that time) family property. I have seen that in our village home. And if property owner wants to sell land where temple was, its completely legal. Again where was "hindu temple committee" in 1975 during the sell and all these years?

I have already answered you in my last post replying to you( for the bold part)

The committees were a must since 1947

 

[Avisheik]

Avishek is trying to say they were unaware of the deal, so they were quite!!! Is it really believable. The big point is the guy sold the land as he took a big sum of money and was unable to pay it and then after registering he fled to India.

So just cos a guys did underhand dealings with you does not make you the rightful owner.

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

I have already answered you in my last post replying to you( for the bold part)

The committees were a must since 1947

I do not think that any committee remain in case of a ruin temple. If there is not a functional temple then what is the purpose of a committee. If really there would be a committe then it would not be remain in ruin for unknown period of time.

 

[CONTINUATOR]

There will be always hue and cry if Mosque were demolished even if that were in private property. These are religious sentiments and we got to live with that. The latest land record shows, the owner is the caretaker of the temple and which should had been resolved first before demolishing anything. The culprit must be punished.

 

[Avisheik]

I do not think that any committee remain in case of a ruin temple. If there is not a functional temple then what is the purpose of a committee. If really there would be a committe then it would not be remain in ruin for unknown period of time.

Chowdhury is the caretaker of the temple, even though its ruined. A caretaker is appointed. And who can appoint a caretaker? a committee. Savy?

 

[lynx]

This whole incident shows the inadequacy of BD laws in protecting places of worship that too of heritage value. Even 100 year old buildings have heritage value and this temple is 500 years old.

 

[CaPtAiN_pLaNeT]

Chowdhury is the caretaker of the temple, even though its ruined. A caretaker is appointed. And who can appoint a caretaker? a committee. Savy?

not cleared who appointed him caretaker since 2000... when he or his father laid claim of the land from 1975. This needs to be seen whether he was really appointed a caretaker or given the position as the land belongs to him or it was a fraud ... a recent manipulation at the land survey authority by giving bribe.

But whatever the matter this group can not deny responsibility of the incident which most likely happened under their full knowledge. But regarding the demolishing the temple, it would be better if he would indicated in the property document he can do whatever he want on the land. Though I think he can do as ruin temple does not fall in the law and likely the hindu family appointed him caretaker as one of his cousin already sold the property to him.

Do you not think a this is fishy when a hindu committee or family appointed a muslim as a caretaker for a temple???

Even if this is true, this clearly states that indeed that family were aware of the dealings and having no other way appointed him as the caretaker of the ruin temple though do not know for which purpose as no restoration activity taken place there.

---------- Post added at 10:31 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:28 AM ----------

This whole incident shows the inadequacy of BD laws in protecting places of worship that too of heritage value. Even 100 year old buildings have heritage value and this temple is 500 years old.

If that is the case of historical value the hindu man should not sell it at the 1st place and should ask government to restore it as a historical site after all it was a ruin.

I have been surprised seeing none of you acknowledged the wrong doing of the hindu man when he sold the land for not able to pay the debt and fled to India.

 

[lynx]

If that is the case of historical value the hindu man should not sell it at the 1st place and should ask government to restore it as a historical site after all it was a ruin.

I have been surprised seeing none of you acknowledged the wrong doing of the hindu man when he sold the land for not able to pay the debt and fled to India.

There is something called courts in your country too..isn't it or you believe in Kangaroo courts. Let the courts decide.