From: verma@pfeast.enet.dec.com (Virendra Verma)
Subject: Re: HINDUS OFFER PRAYERS AT AYODHYA RAM MANDIR
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Distribution: na
Date:  8 JAN 93 09:07:55    


In article <1iiebjINNkrs@crcnis1.unl.edu>, fall217@cse.unl.edu () writes...
> 
>You guys have droped the Income of indian from 360 to 330 $ in the last years.
>India is following the footsteps of USSR. And you guys are leading it 
>down the hill.
> 

	But we guys didn't have any power (at a political level). How could
	you attribute this to us? Cong(I) has followed the footsteps of
	USSR. It is only with the help of BJP that Cong(I) was trying to
	liberalize economic policy.

> 
>Let me tell you for justifiing the demolition of musjid you will have to prove
>following things:
>(1)     Rama was actually born man not a mythalogical character.
>(2)     Ram was born at the same place no where else.
>(3)     If ram can not born more than one place if any other place clamed
>	to be his birth place then claim is void.
>(4)     There was a temple there where masjid was build.
>(5)     Temple was destroyed to build the masjid.
>If you can not prove all thing you can  calim that peace of land.
>I really doubted in any neutral court even onlu one thing can be proved
> 

	We don't have to prove anything. You heard the name of Rama from
	us. We have remarkable record (an Indian way) of Rama Rajya. You
	have to prove that it is all false. The burden is on you who
	dwell in proofs. If you are so fond of proofs, prove that Rama
	did not exist. Your inability to disprove is no proof of non-existence
	of Rama.

>Why?  because:
> 
>Masjid can not be build after destroying any place specially not any temple.
> 

	According to you or Islam? Please clarify.

>At that time when masjid was build why some body bothered to destroy a temple
>and then build a masjid.  While the land was in abandance.  India was not 
>that thicklly populated.

	Because the guy who built wanted to establish his supremacy. Look
	at Babur's diary. You will understand his attitude. Moreover, the
	dispute over demolition is not a 20th century phenomenon. It has
	been alive (and brutally suppressed) ever since the mosque was built.

> 
>Above all do you thing that your forefathers were so coward, mean, crocked 
>that they did not do untill britishers came and were about to leave.
> 

	They were not coward, but were threatened under the sword. Their
	young daughter's were raped, so they chose child marriage. Their
	widows were raped, so they switched to jauhar. Don't ignore history.

> 
>Even if there was a temple  and was destroyed earlier and then some
>one build the masjid after seeing that land is not in use. and temple was 
>not destroyed to bulid the masjid then to clamim masjid is just a 
>Majority decission it has nothing to do with justice.

	It does. Justice is created by the people. We Hindus believe in
	Panchayata Raj where the decisions are taken by majority and
	concensus not by self appointed moron idiots judges. Judges are
	not true representative of people. That is the shame in the name 
	of justice. In U.S. also, the jury is above law.

Would you please bother to bring facts and logic into the discussion rather
than your idiosyncratic stereotyped ideas? 

namaste,

-- Virendra Verma
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer:
   My employer is not responsible for my views. Read my views at your 
   own risk.
   ****
   tamso ma jyotir gamaha	   - [Lord] take me from darkness to light.
   shramam bina na kimapi saddhyam - Nothing gets accomplished without work
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian