Is being Anti-Islam the same as Pro-Indian?

[bronxbull]

It wasn't so wicked but the moderates dont cut it for me,frankly.

 

[bronxbull]

There is something funny,i have noticed.

Whenever people take a stance,the leftists always take a moderate stance but when it comes to the Hindu right,The Indian left always takes extreme moderate stances.

 

[rubyjackass]

This is an absurd statement ….no ‘saffronist’ would ever call Charminar a religious structure. It’s only islamist who would call it that to bring legitimacy to their demand of not having the temple there.

Ahem Ahem. read about the views of some self declared saffronists on the relevant thread. But you are right, I should have added the qualifier 'some' before saffronists. Not all saffronists tolerate such a view.

Naturally …… you have admitted that Charminar is a non religious structure …then there should be no problem in having a temple there.

Are you implying temples should not exist anywhere near “Muslim Stronghold” ? By that same logic …no mosque should exist near Hindu stronghold …which is pretty much most of India.

And that anger is precisely what the ‘safronist’ question….its not warranted ..and reeks of bigotry.



Temples are not allowed near non-religious structures ? …you see how absurd this keeps getting ?



LOL…if muslims want the temple out of there because they live near it …how are they ‘secular’ ? …......This is getting ridiculous…..dont you see this ?

Are you going to sit here and pretend that its OK for ‘secular’ muslims to be bigots ?

You come out of the blue in an unrelated thread without having any context. Read the conversations between me and KS on the Bhagya Lakshmi temple thread. The temple should be moved because it was an illegal construction. No such constructions were allowed around heritage monuments according to Indian law. The relevant laws can be found in the above mentioned thread. Go read that stuff before pouncing on with half information.

I would say the structure which happened to be a temple should be moved even if it were a mosque constructed after 1950. I have tried my best to not show my 'impartiality' by referring to a counter example. But you would not stop until you hear from someone 'I would say the same thing even if it were a mosque'.

How does existence of a Temple near Charminar “ridicule” Muslim heritage ? You really need to explain that part …I suspect it holds the key to this whole discussion.

Does that mean existence of a Church or Mosque in India “RIDICULE” Hindu, Buddhist, Jain Heritage ?



You do realize that anyone who supports a Bigot is a bigot themselves ….you are now claiming that muslim community is full of religious bigots.

I hope in your reply you will actually answer the questions I have raised and not go of into a tangent with Rhetoric's and straw-man arguments.

Get to know the facts mann. Read about the 'secular muslim' views under the comments section Hindu news articles about the issue. They just want it moved so that (as a historical non-religious monument)Charminar is spared from the attention the temple gets.

Such misinformed half informed bigotry.
A line for you: One need not be consistent to be right once.
If the Islamists also share the same view, it does not automatically means it is wrong.

This age is not for communal revenge,what is this age for then?

Ranjit Singh rules Punjab and say Hindus ruled many Indian states,then why did they not demolish any mosque and how did they treat anyone badly in anyway?

we still see so many punjabis and bengalis batting like this?

perhaps the mutton biryani tastes good but nobody cares about their progeny 300 years down the line?

Sorry. I forgot you are from 200 years ago. I am talking to people living in India in 2012. You will know better when you come to the present along with your Taliban brethren who are stuck in still earlier ages.

 

[rubyjackass]

I dont recall any Hindu ruler treating Muslims unjustly or as second class citizens when they were ruling.

Largely true. But there are examples. Gulab Singh comes to mind. He massacred Afghan tribesmen while being a commander under Ranjit Singh.

Sorry, what a foreigner from Ferghana did to one of our holiest places cannot by any stretch of dhimmitude become my heritage. Infact it cannot become the heritage of any self-respecting guy born on this soil. Plus the babri structure stood as a grim reminder of, not what would happen if religious intolerance is allowed to spiral out, but rather as the victory structure of a central asian invader who came here to loot and pillage.

Yes, what happened was bad. Even if we admit that there was a temple in that place, where do you stop if you begin unravelling history?! Even Charminar is being claimed as a structure built over a temple! This madness once started will not stop. We have a standing example on our west. How many temples must have been demolished there without our notice? Just by destroying a mosque, you cannot defeat religious intolerance. It still will remain a fact that Babar won Delhi and butchered a crore of Indians(Hindus if you may, but also remember he won over a Muslim king to take over Delhi). Also as much as you dont like it, the central Asian invader made India as his home and ruled from here.

If it remains there, it will remind us as to what will happen if we don't defend our country the next time around.

By attacking such mere symbols, you are just trying to forget history, a futile exercise. The fact remains that our ancestors lived as Dhimmis and now we better prevent anyone else from getting such a status.

 

[bronxbull]

Ahem Ahem. read about the views of some self declared saffronists on the relevant thread. But you are right, I should have added the qualifier 'some' before saffronists. Not all saffronists tolerate such a view.



You come out of the blue in an unrelated thread without having any context. Read the conversations between me and KS on the Bhagya Lakshmi temple thread. The temple should be moved because it was an illegal construction. No such constructions were allowed around heritage monuments according to Indian law. The relevant laws can be found in the above mentioned thread. Go read that stuff before pouncing on with half information.

I would say the structure which happened to be a temple should be moved even if it were a mosque constructed after 1950. I have tried my best to not show my 'impartiality' by referring to a counter example. But you would not stop until you hear from someone 'I would say the same thing even if it were a mosque'.


Get to know the facts mann. Read about the 'secular muslim' views under the comments section Hindu news articles about the issue. They just want it moved so that (as a historical non-religious monument)Charminar is spared from the attention the temple gets.

Such misinformed half informed bigotry.
A line for you: One need not be consistent to be right once.
If the Islamists also share the same view, it does not automatically means it is wrong.


Sorry. I forgot you are from 200 years ago. I am talking to people living in India in 2012. You will know better when you come to the present along with your Taliban brethren who are stuck in still earlier ages.

Ok sir,we are primitive people,but please tell us ho to go forward?

Tell us sir,what should we do in 2012,now that, it is behind us?

whats the path forward?

we are keen to hear what is your vision forward,since where we ware and how we are is not good enough for you?

 

[zaxcolix]

Ahem Ahem. read about the views of some self declared saffronists on the relevant thread. But you are right, I should have added the qualifier 'some' before saffronists. Not all saffronists tolerate such a view.

...its quite all right....some Islamist are allowed small slip ups.

You come out of the blue in an unrelated thread without having any context. Read the conversations between me and KS on the Bhagya Lakshmi temple thread. The temple should be moved because it was an illegal construction. No such constructions were allowed around heritage monuments according to Indian law. The relevant laws can be found in the above mentioned thread. Go read that stuff before pouncing on with half information.

AP High court has given legal sanction to the temple by passing order for its restoration. Islamists declaring it an 'illegal structure' does not make it illegal. The constitution and courts make it so.

I would say the structure which happened to be a temple should be moved even if it were a mosque constructed after 1950. I have tried my best to not show my 'impartiality' by referring to a counter example. But you would not stop until you hear from someone 'I would say the same thing even if it were a mosque'.

You have to explain why you demand the temple be moved after High Court has declared it legal.

Get to know the facts mann. Read about the 'secular muslim' views under the comments section Hindu news articles about the issue. They just want it moved so that (as a historical non-religious monument) Charminar is spared from the attention the temple gets.

Its an historical monument built by a Muslim King using Muslim style architecture. It was built in 1591, to commemorate the beginning of the second Islamic millennium year (1000 AH). It certainly has a religious significance attached to it.

Now ...be that it may ..why should the charminar be spared from the attention the temple gets ? There are a million shops and street vendors next to it ...why is the charminar not spared the attention it gets from them ?

Such misinformed half informed bigotry.
A line for you: One need not be consistent to be right once.
If the Islamists also share the same view, it does not automatically means it is wrong.

I have been called worse ..... so to translate ...Islamist are allowed "at least one" free ticket to be bigots.

 

[bronxbull]

Largely true. But there are examples. Gulab Singh comes to mind. He massacred Afghan tribesmen while being a commander under Ranjit Singh.


Yes, what happened was bad. Even if we admit that there was a temple in that place, where do you stop if you begin unravelling history?! Even Charminar is being claimed as a structure built over a temple! This madness once started will not stop. We have a standing example on our west. How many temples must have been demolished there without our notice? Just by destroying a mosque, you cannot defeat religious intolerance. It still will remain a fact that Babar won Delhi and butchered a crore of Indians(Hindus if you may, but also remember he won over a Muslim king to take over Delhi). Also as much as you dont like it, the central Asian invader made India as his home and ruled from here.

If it remains there, it will remind us as to what will happen if we don't defend our country the next time around.

By attacking such mere symbols, you are just trying to forget history, a futile exercise. The fact remains that our ancestors lived as Dhimmis and now we better prevent anyone else from getting such a status.

yeah,you should bend over and let them have a peek and more?

wow,Gulab certainly fell flat in history for doing that,how can he do that and hence give away the good boy scout award due in 2013 from the wisest of the ones here?

gulab,ke kariya tussi?

pathano ka khoon kharaaba kardiya?

chumma dedeta,pyaar se maang leta,

mana thorhi karega?

Centuries of pent-up anger? Oh, you mean from the eleventh century to the eighteenth century? And this is legitimate, but not the anger of the adivasis, or of the hillmen of the north-east, or the Darjeeling Gurkhas, or the Bodo or nearly a score of other tribes, including Nagas, Mizos, Kukis and Khasis?

Do you realize that they are already in fights against the brutality of the civilians from other regions?

it is 12-17 and that is still a plural five.

And they are all doing fine,they have quotas and help.

Most importantly,nobody went to them and asked to change the way they see the world,taking their property is one thing but taking their soul ain't even the same.

telengana banega,mandir bhi banega.

jiska himmat hain,talwar utaake beech sadak pahuncho,

muqabla hojygi.

 

[rubyjackass]

yeah,you should bend over and let them have a peek and more?

wow,Gulab certainly fell flat in history for doing that,how can he do that and hence give away the good boy scout award due in 2013 from the wisest of the ones here?

gulab,ke kariya tussi?

pathano ka khoon kharaaba kardiya?

chumma dedeta,pyaar se maang leta,

mana thorhi karega?

What is your point? That Hindu chauvinism did not exist in India at all? How did Jainism and Buddhism disappear from India? I just don't remember or bother searching for the kings who are involved.

 

[zaxcolix]

What is your point? That Hindu chauvinism did not exist in India at all? How did Jainism and Buddhism disappear from India? I just don't remember or bother searching for the kings who are involved.

LOL ....Jains and Buddhists are alive and well in India. Hindus consider Jains and Buddhists to be part of Hiduism ... it gets better, most Jains are Buddhists also consider Hinduism to be a part of their faith.

Please do bother to search for kings who were involved in " the mysterious ...whatnot" and share with us. We are eager to know this "mysterious fact".

 

[KRAIT]

What is your point? That Hindu chauvinism did not exist in India at all? How did Jainism and Buddhism disappear from India? I just don't remember or bother searching for the kings who are involved.

Jainism got disappeared ?

Who told you that ?

 

[rubyjackass]

...its quite all right....some Islamist are allowed small slip ups.



AP High court has given legal sanction to the temple by passing order for its restoration. Islamists declaring it an 'illegal structure' does not make it illegal. The constitution and courts make it so.
You have to explain why you demand the temple be moved after High Court has declared it legal.

The question before the court is not the legality of the structure.

Its an historical monument built by a Muslim King using Muslim style architecture. It was built in 1591, to commemorate the beginning of the second Islamic millennium year (1000 AH). It certainly has a religious significance attached to it.

Now ...be that it may ..why should the charminar be spared from the attention the temple gets ? There are a million shops and street vendors next to it ...why is the charminar not spared the attention it gets from them ?

One of the other narratives is that it commemorates the eradication of malaria from the city. Sure there is a debate about the origin of the monument. But when there is no commonly agreed narrative why call it religious? Your version is just one of the theories.

It would be all the world better if the circle around Charminar is cleared up of the street vendors. Even better if people are not allowed to weaken the structure by climbing it.

I have been called worse ..... so to translate ...Islamist are allowed "at least one" free ticket to be bigots.

Not surprised. But the correct translation is:Even bigots can be right once in a while. And we should not mistake it to be wrong because a bigot said it.

Jainism got disappeared ?

Who told you that ?

Sure. A slip up, sorry. I am having a lot of heated arguments simultaneously.
What i meant was that from the height of their power and prominence, both these religions came to where they are now. Where as in the countries which got these religions from India(except Afghanistan of course), they are still alive in large numbers.

 

[zaxcolix]

Let me quote from the easist source ....

Decline of Buddhism in India - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Buddhism had seen a steady growth from its beginnings in the 6th century BCE to its endorsement as state religion of the Maurya Empire under Ashoka in the 3rd century BCE. It continued to flourish during the final centuries BCE and the first centuries of the Common Era, and spread even beyond the Indian subcontinent to Central Asia and beyond to China. But a steady decline of Buddhism in India set in during the later Gupta era and under the Pala Empire. Chinese monks traveling through the region between the 5th and 8th centuries CE, such as Faxian, Xuanzang, Yijing, Huisheng, and Song Yun, began to speak of a decline of the Buddhist sangha, especially in the wake of the White Hun invasion. Decline continued after the fall of the Pala dynasty in the 12th century CE and the gradual Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent.

White Huns - Afghanistan and beyond.

The reality is that Buddism which was strong in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Bangladesh is extinct there and the population there is now almost 100% muslims. So tell me again .....how did the Buddhist in South Asia disappear?

 

[bronxbull]

Do you how many Buddhist Viharas still exist?

Do you how much of Buddhist/Jain Literature is still around?

If thats the case why do Jains all over India have no bad blood with the Hindus?

Why do you see no political problems between them and the hindus and they are amongst the richest communities in India?

Do you know what is theravada buddhism?

Did the Hindus vandalize the library in Nalanda,have they ransacked Bodh Gaya or dont they go there when they go to varnasi/haridwar,my own grandparents and parents consider it as holy as varnasi/haridwar/rishikesh.

why you spinning random stories and making a weak defense for yourself?

Since you are from Chennai,do you about the wars between Theravada Buddhism and Saiva Tamils in the 15th century and even that did not prevent a peace between Tamils and Sinhalese until recently in 1947.

Do you know how much of jain literature is there in Tamil Language,most of it is.

Dont the hindus revere it themselves?

 

[KRAIT]

@rubyjackass What happened to these religions in India ? Kindly explain.

 

[bronxbull]

The question before the court is not the legality of the structure.

One of the other narratives is that it commemorates the eradication of malaria from the city. Sure there is a debate about the origin of the monument. But when there is no commonly agreed narrative why call it religious? Your version is just one of the theories.

It would be all the world better if the circle around Charminar is cleared up of the street vendors. Even better if people are not allowed to weaken the structure by climbing it.


Not surprised. But the correct translation is:Even bigots can be right once in a while. And we should not mistake it to be wrong because a bigot said it.


Sure. A slip up, sorry. I am having a lot of heated arguments simultaneously.
What i meant was that from the height of their power and prominence, both these religions came to where they are now. Where as in the countries which got these religions from India(except Afghanistan of course), they are still alive in large numbers.

which country has jains apart from india?

south africa/east africa?