RE:mecca masjid
by on Dec 13, 2007 06:59 PM Permalink
they have many standards, let them be in their dirty bylanes of charminar, no place for them in developed part of hyderabad.
RE:mecca masjid
by Dhirendra Tiwari on Dec 13, 2007 07:26 PM Permalink
hyderabad has been touble since the .... birth of this nation.... there is nothing new about these..people
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by grir reeg on Dec 13, 2007 06:55 PM Permalink
temple is for humans. its not for beasts and barbarians. any human can enter the temple, but barbarians are not allowed unless they change their ways and become acceptable to society
RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by jimmy joseph on Dec 13, 2007 07:02 PM Permalink
you dont know where temple is ? thats why some jokers are leading you to some bodys mosque? first touch your are heart in Truth , and search where temple is ? poking at somebody a.. is waste.
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Gautam Sinha on Dec 13, 2007 07:10 PM Permalink
Hi Jimmy, Some South Indian temples are plagued by this kind of orthodoxy, despite great reformers telling them so many times. Please come to normal Indian temples - anybody of any faith is welcome.
RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by jimmy joseph on Dec 13, 2007 07:18 PM Permalink
Know there is no vaccancy in my Institutional belief, RCSC. if i need ,let you know.
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by indian animator on Dec 13, 2007 07:04 PM Permalink
Forget about non-hindus... even in Hindus the lower castes are not allowed to enter in many temples... these things are there in almost all the religon... but its nothing to do with the religion, its the people following that religon who impose such restrictions....
RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Gautam Sinha on Dec 13, 2007 07:14 PM Permalink
Despite Shankaracharya himself writing about how he learnt that these divisions are meaningless in Vanaras, these conditions still carry on in some places.
RE:RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Dhirendra Tiwari on Dec 13, 2007 07:35 PM Permalink
if u have strange..beard...don;t enter temple...people...might get..scared....rest nobocy cares.......
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by jimmy joseph on Dec 13, 2007 06:57 PM Permalink
hello rediff pl dont worry if some body send abuse words? i can take and send arrows right into evil hearts.
RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by sree priya on Dec 13, 2007 07:05 PM Permalink
Welcome to the religion that accepts all other religion, Mr Jimmy.
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by jose on Dec 13, 2007 07:17 PM Permalink
you talk about other religion upper caste people don't allow lower caste people to enter the temple. Dun talk shit sree priya. First you peep into yourself and then you see where u stand before you point out others
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Dhirendra Tiwari on Dec 13, 2007 07:32 PM Permalink
cool...down...plz don't get angry!!
RE:RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Gautam Sinha on Dec 13, 2007 07:12 PM Permalink
You should be ashamed of projecting hatred and superiority complex using temples as an excuse. If someone wants to visit temple it may be complementary to church worship too Ms Priya. As a hindu you should know that any place of worship is equivalent to a temple.
RE:RE:RE:RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by jose on Dec 13, 2007 07:20 PM Permalink
Well said Gautam Sinha, if priya would have had that much of common sence she would not have commented like that
RE:A mosque is a private property, Permission is must for extra activities.
by Cricket s on Dec 13, 2007 07:33 PM Permalink
Jimmy, tell me one religion that does not discriminate. Show me one perfect human being. You can't. Christians going around telling other people that they are sinners and that they can be saved ONLY by JESUS is also a form of discrimination. Telling others that your religion is superior to others is nothing but a upper caste vs lower caste discrimination.
Yes non-hindus are not allowed in a handful of Temples. Caste system is bad. Do you know that Caste system is widespread among christians of India. It is so widespread that recently the Catholic church had a state wide meeting in TN just to discuss this topic.
she is a perfect muslim, let the jehadis mind their business, they are out of job, in hyderabad it is a fashion of the muslim leaders to create nuisence, some have become parasite.they are the future troble for the nation
Idots have no work to do rather than fighting on petty matters. Definitely if permission is required by law of the land(India) then it should have been sought for, as no one is above that. Other than that why the fuss abt that we have more important work to do.
Why should Sania and her party choose a place of worship for commercial adds? Is she idiot or something to not know that religion does not mix well with such commercial-cum-sensual activities
People supporting her are only morbid minds joined in blind hatred against Islam
RE:I DEFEND CLERICS
by Sheetal Kaur on Dec 13, 2007 06:57 PM Permalink
What a waste of time of the courts, The venue was chosen by the advert makers not Sania, beside doesn't India have an advertising standards agency to whom this could be reported and the advert banned to be aired saving valuable court time.The cost of making avert and the fine imposed on the advert maker is enough to send the message out that the place of worship regardless of which religion is not open to exploitation. Just as in west all misleading adverts or material that is degrading and that sends out wrong message to masses is reported by the public to ASA whose decision is final and an apology and the out come is aired on the national TV channels.
RE:I DEFEND CLERICS
by kamal sharma on Dec 13, 2007 06:49 PM Permalink
she has limited source of funds & her expenditures r obviously & rightly high. SHE 7 CO. HAS TO CREATE SUCH CONTROVERSIES TO OBTAIN MEDIA SPACE
RE:I DEFEND CLERICS
by KhukharShikari on Dec 13, 2007 06:47 PM Permalink
Arms are very dear to muzzies god as he was criminal kind of person..Now the solution is demolish the mosque as sania shoot a ad film over there. :)
RE:RE:vulgarity is in man's eyes not woman's body
by Green Earth on Dec 13, 2007 06:53 PM Permalink
It was not a nude photo shoot my friend. She was well dressed. Yes, if there was a photography restriction, then I guess they must have obtained permission anywhere not just in Macca Masjid.
Andhra Govt do not arrest Muslic MLA who beat Medicos in the Hospital, But they file case immediately if Mullas complain.. Medicos has to beg for p[rotection..But Govt do not listen because of fear of loosing muslim Votes..Kick this B..Congis from the country..then India will prosper.
RE:Minority Pleasing Acts - Hipocratic Govts
by MeraBharat Mahan on Dec 13, 2007 06:43 PM Permalink
Its ok to bash Lord Ram. Its ok to question the existence of Lord Ram. Its also okay to say anything about Hindu temples and denigrate Hindus. Its ok that MF Hussain can paint paintings of Goddess Saraswati and Lakshmi in the nude, and secularists call it freedom. Request self proclaimed secularists like Javed Akhtar, Dilip Kumar and co. to come out in the open and support Sania.
