From one angle it looks as if an earthquake has hit the village. From another, it is obvious that whatever the disaster, it picked its victims carefully.
In pristine snow by a shimmering lake, the ruins of 13 houses lie scattered amid the untouched cottages of their neighbours.
The iron fence around them is smashed. Just by its side, two Barbie dolls lie abandoned, their blue plastic eyes staring into the distance.
"This was the living room," Marina says, pointing at the pile of rubble.
She picks up her bundled-up three-year-old son and remembers how representatives of the local administration burst through a hole they made in the wall. Their unexpected visit, she says, was announced only by a loud rumble of a bulldozer.
'We apply for land registration, and every time we are turned down. But then the authorities come and destroy our homes because we don't have the registration'
Maxim Varfolameev
Krishna community spokesperson
"I had just put the baby to sleep, and heard the noise," Marina said. "I thought the road was being fixed, next thing I knew there was a hole in my wall and it all came crushing down. And I just starting screaming and crying, and the baby started crying".
Twelve other families lost their homes in a very similar way, as the local authorities of Karasai district destroyed part of the Hare Krishna settlement just outside Kazakhstan's largest city, Almaty.
They also vowed to come back to take down the rest.
Economic boom
Local authorities say the decision had nothing to do with religion, but with the fact that the community is occupying the land illegally.
But it is an argument no-one in the village seems to believe.
The self-sustained farm of 60 households is the only Hindu settlement in Central Asia and has existed for more than a decade.
Over the years, the festivals held on the farm had become famous among Hindus across the region.
With Kazakhstan's economy booming, the value of the land began to climb a few years ago.
Ever since then, the Hare Krishna followers say, the local government has begun to pressure them to leave.
The authorities say the community does not have proper land registration documents. But the followers say they have been continuously turned down while trying to register.
No one has ever challenged it except Prof. P. N. Oak, who believes the whole world has been duped. In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak says the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz's tomb but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya ) . In the course of his research O ak discovered that the Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. In his own court ch ronicle, Badshahnama, Shah Jahan admits that an exceptionally beautiful grand mansion in Agra was taken from Jai SIngh for Mumtaz's burial . The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur still retains in his secret collection two orders from Shah Jahan for surrendering the Taj building. Using captured temples and mansions, as a burial place for dead courtiers and royalty was a common practice among Muslim rulers.
For example, Humayun,Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried in such mansions. Oak's inquiries began with the name of Taj Mahal. He says
the term " Mahal " has never been used for a building in any Muslim countries from Afghanisthan to Algeria .. "The unusual explanation that the term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal was illogical in atleast two respects.
Firstly, her name was never Mumtaz Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani," he writes. Secondly, one cannot omit the first three letters 'Mum' from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name for the building."Taj Mahal, he claims, is a corrupt version of Tejo Mahalaya, or Lord Shiva's Palace . Oak also says the love story of Mumtaz and Shah Jahan is a fairy tale created by court sycophants, blundering historians and sloppy archaeologists Not a single royal chronicle of Shah Jahan's time corroborates the love story.
Furthermore, Oak cites several documents suggesting the Taj Mahal predates Shah Jahan's era, and was a temple dedicated to Shiva, worshipped by Rajputs of Agra city. For example, Prof. Marvin Miller of New York took a few samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj. Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah Jahan. European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo,who visited Agra in 1638 (only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the cit y in his memoirs. But he makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built. The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year of Mumtaz's death, also suggest the Taj was a noteworthy building well before Shah Jahan's time.
Prof. Oak points out a number of design and architectural inconsistencies that support the belief of the Taj Mahal being a typical Hindu temple rather than a mausoleum. Many rooms in the Taj ! Mahal have remained sealed since Shah Jahan's time and are still inaccessible to the public . Oak asserts they contain a headless statue of Lord Shiva and other objects commonly used for worship rituals in Hindu temples Fearing political backlash, Indira Gandhi's government t ried to have Prof. Oak's book withdrawn from the bookstores, and threatened the Indian publisher of the first edition dire consequences . There is only one way to discredit or validate Oak's research.
The current government should open the sealed rooms of the Taj Ma hal under U.N. supervision, and let international experts investigate.
No one has ever challenged it except Prof. P. N. Oak, who believes the whole world has been duped. In his book Taj Mahal: The True Story, Oak says the Taj Mahal is not Queen Mumtaz's tomb but an ancient Hindu temple palace of Lord Shiva (then known as Tejo Mahalaya ) . In the course of his research O ak discovered that the Shiva temple palace was usurped by Shah Jahan from then Maharaja of Jaipur, Jai Singh. In his own court ch ronicle, Badshahnama, Shah Jahan admits that an exceptionally beautiful grand mansion in Agra was taken from Jai SIngh for Mumtaz's burial . The ex-Maharaja of Jaipur still retains in his secret collection two orders from Shah Jahan for surrendering the Taj building. Using captured temples and mansions, as a burial place for dead courtiers and royalty was a common practice among Muslim rulers.
For example, Humayun,Akbar, Etmud-ud-Daula and Safdarjung are all buried in such mansions. Oak's inquiries began with the name of Taj Mahal. He says
the term " Mahal " has never been used for a building in any Muslim countries from Afghanisthan to Algeria .. "The unusual explanation that the term Taj Mahal derives from Mumtaz Mahal was illogical in atleast two respects.
Firstly, her name was never Mumtaz Mahal but Mumtaz-ul-Zamani," he writes. Secondly, one cannot omit the first three letters 'Mum' from a woman's name to derive the remainder as the name for the building."Taj Mahal, he claims, is a corrupt version of Tejo Mahalaya, or Lord Shiva's Palace . Oak also says the love story of Mumtaz and Shah Jahan is a fairy tale created by court sycophants, blundering historians and sloppy archaeologists Not a single royal chronicle of Shah Jahan's time corroborates the love story.
Furthermore, Oak cites several documents suggesting the Taj Mahal predates Shah Jahan's era, and was a temple dedicated to Shiva, worshipped by Rajputs of Agra city. For example, Prof. Marvin Miller of New York took a few samples from the riverside doorway of the Taj. Carbon dating tests revealed that the door was 300 years older than Shah Jahan. European traveler Johan Albert Mandelslo,who visited Agra in 1638 (only seven years after Mumtaz's death), describes the life of the cit y in his memoirs. But he makes no reference to the Taj Mahal being built. The writings of Peter Mundy, an English visitor to Agra within a year of Mumtaz's death, also suggest the Taj was a noteworthy building well before Shah Jahan's time.
Prof. Oak points out a number of design and architectural inconsistencies that support the belief of the Taj Mahal being a typical Hindu temple rather than a mausoleum. Many rooms in the Taj ! Mahal have remained sealed since Shah Jahan's time and are still inaccessible to the public . Oak asserts they contain a headless statue of Lord Shiva and other objects commonly used for worship rituals in Hindu temples Fearing political backlash, Indira Gandhi's government t ried to have Prof. Oak's book withdrawn from the bookstores, and threatened the Indian publisher of the first edition dire consequences . There is only one way to discredit or validate Oak's research.
The current government should open the sealed rooms of the Taj Ma hal under U.N. supervision, and let international experts investigate.
CONTRA-ARGUMENTS TO STATEMENTS OF KAZAKH GOVERNMENT REGARDING LEGAL GROUNDS FOR BULLDOZING KRISHNA COMMUNITY AT KARASAI DISTRICT
Kazakhstan Government states: %u201CAs a matter of fact, ISKCON as a religious association doesn%u2019t own the land.%u201D
ISKCON: Originaly the land of 47.7 hectares was purchased by members of ISKCON in 1999 in the Karasai district of Almaty, 40 km from the Almaty city. As laws changed members of ISKCON were able to privatize the land in the spring of 2004. ISKCON as organization purchased the land later in 2004. According to the Supreme Court of Republic of Kazakhstan, ruling No.3a-61/2-05 June 30, 2005, ISKCON has a right of land use. It is confirmed by the ruling of the RK Supreme Court that ISKCON is a bona fide land user and purchaser of the land plots at issue. This ruling has never been cancelled. According to the law of Kazakhstan it is still in force and cannot be overruled by lower courts%u2019 decisions. Significantly, the Supreme Court ruled that the land in question %u201Cis given to the Religious Organization Society for Krishna Consciousness%u201D with the right of full private ownership arising upon registration of the land. However, the local government froze all transactions on the property such that proper registration could not take place.
Kazakhstan Government states: %u201DThe right for land use was acquired by members of ISKCON illegally in 1999 by arbitrarily changing its functional purpose in violation of the Farming Law of Kazakhstan.%u201D
ISKCON: First, there is no Farming Law in the legislative system of Kazakhstan. In the court practice of the RK questions regulating violations of the legislation in the sphere of land use are considered by the court exclusively on the basis of the Land Code of RK dated June 20, 2003, and the Code of Administrative Infractions of January 20, 2001.
Second, members of ISKCON were conducting all the transactions with the land strictly according to the Legislation of Kazakhstan, with full approval of the government authorities.
Third, the issue of a forgery committed at the time of entering into the contract of sale-puchase in 1999 was not confirmed by the legal bodies of the RK. There was no ruling of the criminal court in regard to the persons that made this contract (because such actions are subject to criminal prosecution and punishment). Not only the fact of forgery was not established, but it had never been proved that these were the members of the community who commited it, let alone the community. In this case according to presumption of innocence no one can accuse ISKCON in breaking the Law.
Forth, the government%u2019s attempts to find disc
whatever aurangazeb did was to convert forcefully or damage temples.whereas modi and the gujarathis who live in this 21 century killed muslims barbaricaly in gujarath .the simple truth is that if our historians say that he converted forcefully then our country would be muslim majority since he ruled most part of the country in differnt times.our saffronised historians and politicians just want to justify their action in their own interest.whoever read the quran i am sure he shall know the truth.a true muslim wont do forcefull conversion.read quran before.its a eyeopener
RE:dont just
by BALASUBRAMANIAN VISWANATHAN on Feb 17, 2007 03:25 PM Permalink
Sure u need to be proud of ur ancestor. Blood is thicker than water.Remember India was fully Hindustan before Mughals invaded & devasted thousands of temples & killed lakhs of Hindus.Even now thousands of temples stand ravaged with the idols desecrated without limbs, hands, heads etc tell the story.Maybe the descendants are not fully satisfied & hence have taken up terrorism to achieve the dreams of the ancestors. But truth will always prevail.
RE:dont just
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 03:10 PM Permalink
Let me see you condemn this if you live in SECULAR INDIA, and you call yourself SECULAR INDIAN.
URGENT NEWS: Government of Kazakhstan demolishes cottages in Hindu community
RE:dont just
by Jaganniwas Iyer on Feb 17, 2007 03:41 PM Permalink
Spoken like a true member of your faith, Ahmed. And don't try to sell us this baloney about Aurangzeb. As for Gujarat, you seem to have a very 'convenient' memory. I mean, you speak as if the poor Muslims were innocent and Hindus alone are monsters. What happened in Gujarat was a just punishment for the barbarism your co-religionists inflicted on innocent Hindus at Godhra, for which Hindus taught the jihadis a real lesson. Spare us your sermons. And by the way, Aurangzeb failed not because of want of trying. It's just that he and his thugs couldn't handle the Hindu military resurgence. Jaganniwas Iyer
Article on truth about Aurangzeb is aboslutely false giving false information & elaborating the same to tarnish Aurangzeb image.Further such articles are only intend to create hattrede between two communities & gain respect among one community.Please apply your little mind that Aurangzeb was honest true emperor among all Mugal emperors. His justice was well known. He never misused peoples tax money for his comforts & luxuries.For his daily living needs he used to stich caps & used to get money after after sale of the same. Whereever he found wrong antisocial acts going under shelter of Muslim Mazars or Hindu temples or any other worship place he finished the root cause of the same. Why historian does not tell truth & shows only one side as cruelity.Aurangzeb has ruled for more than 30 years, and if he was so cruel no non Muslim would have been left in India & nobody would have been tolerated his rule for such a long period.In fact he was very kind to public of all religion & had given all liberty to follw them there religion, but he was very strict & straight forward for antisocial acts. Also Mr.writer in Indian past history emperors never used to fight for religion as it is being projected today. Our politicians & hardliners are converting such facts into wrong history & dividing people in the name of religion for there ulterior motives so that there accountibility for providing good living standard could not be questioned by innocent immotional public.I hope this message would clears misleading about Graet Emperor AurangZeb.
RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by Jaganniwas Iyer on Feb 17, 2007 03:47 PM Permalink
I am so grateful to the Shamim Ansaris. All true Hindus - and I don't mean the Hindu name-sporting jihadi agents like Romila Thapars, Setalvads, Bidwais or others - should be grateful. Their postings on this message board about Aurangzeb only confirms what we already know about their community and faith - an intolerant, barbaric, expansionist and terrorist ideology. For them, no Hindu (except the slave) is good and no Muslim can do any wrong. Wake up to the 'religion of peace.' Jaganniwas Iyer
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by Kishore Babu TVN on Feb 17, 2007 04:21 PM Permalink
Vandemataram is not rubbish , If u doesnt like that song and culture of INDIA which says BORN LAND is mother of mothers u can very well leave this country and go to ur heaven countries and practice ur culture (join bombing groups).
RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by mohammed uddin on Feb 17, 2007 05:27 PM Permalink
F**k U Do continue with same attitude and do not change despite Lord Mount batin and Raja Ram Mohan Rai's efforts, still pray MAHA LINGAM
RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by sudhindra kamalapur on Feb 17, 2007 03:35 PM Permalink
Non Muslims (read Hindus) were left in India due to sacrifice of people like Chattrapati Sambhaji, Guru Tegh Bahadur and other such people. Now the so called secularist and others will say that these people were wrong or still better they were misguided etc etc
RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by on Feb 17, 2007 03:08 PM Permalink
Can u tell me if aurangzeb is so good a ruler why he imposed Jazia tax on Hindus.Assuming something wrong(May be U mean praying Idols is wrong in the eyes of a crooked Muslim ruler who came to India just to suck the blood of Hindus!) in Hindu Temple administration how can you justify wanton destruction of Temples for that-he should have punished only perpetrators of wrong doings-what kind of rule it is-You thing this a benevolent rule?Well Aurangzeb actually tried to convert all but there were lots of oppostion also-every body is not like your forefathers who changed colours for fear or gain!I have worked in Gulf and Africa and I know what Islam is and for-so donot bluff Subu
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by prabhu n on Feb 17, 2007 03:47 PM Permalink
Hey!!! whatever you say is 100% true..why do hindu change to muslim?? are these muslim traitors.....
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by mohammed uddin on Feb 17, 2007 03:39 PM Permalink
CHANGE IS INEVITABLE RESISTANCE TO CHANGE Is my reply to this article. I would not have made my comments on this article, had I not seen VANDE MATARAM, if vandemataram describes the MOTHER LAND as NATION IS GOD, or I PRAY LAND, or I BOW BEFORE LAND then I do not sing that rubbish. I do distinguish the diff. between GOD and LAND, though I am ready to sacrifice my life for the protection of my BIRTH LAND but I am not stupid to call the LAND AS GOD, I am firm believer that HUMAN BEING is superior among all creations / creatures, rest all are servants of HUMANBEING. I do not pray, SUN, MOON, EARTH, STAR, FIRE, WATER, LAND, TREE, STONE, GENETALS. If this gets clear, then the article itself nullifies Assuming that my forefather had I forcible conversion, I do not mind, because now at this age I equally distinguish the difference in between ISLAM and other religion, and I got pride to be a MUSLIM, because ONLY ONE ALMIGHTY is my GOD who is free from all SHAPES, I need not have to give shape to my GOD so as to concentrate, if I am doing that I am distorting the image of GOD at my whelms and fancies whom I have not seen. Coming to AURANGZEB When INDIA obtained INDEPENDENCE under its CONSTITUTION it was written that STATUSQUO shall be maintained, that mean if a structure on that day of independence is a TEMPLE, then shall remain as temple, and if a structure is a MOSQUE shall remain so, irrespective of that building%u2019s or land%u2019s history. This clause is mature enough while viewing MASS and dealing with, because how long one can live in the past ??, how for some one can go back, and find the history and authenticity of the history??. Today it%u2019s a mosque yesterday was a temple day before could have been a mosque or a Buddhist temple???. Therefore STRIKING POINT is essential, and was successfully done at the time of INDEPENDENCE OF INDAI, by the people with knowledge, foresight and value based politicians. What all happened in ayodhya has gone endless, and created hatred in two communities. This proposed exhibition will not yield good result, except added hatred. I DO NOT ADVOCATE ALL DOINGS OF AURANGZEB
Coming to JAZIYA the tax, every nation has same practice, in the form of SALES TAX, INCOME TAX, ENTERTAINMENT TAX, and all DIRECT and INDIRECT TAXES. At the era of Aurangzeb MUSLIMS were paying ZAKATH and non Muslims JAZIYA.
Author of this article is praising WOMEN WITH OPEN FACE, WATCH TV, FILMS
MODESTY IS personal choice, its good to be house lady than a Fashion Model Does any religion advocates a lady and a gentleman to act as wife and husband, once they are not, even on screen ???. SOCIENTAL EVILS ARE ROOT CAUSE OF FILMS. Should I prolong saying that how our Indian females are giving off their clothes oflate, is this not the gift of WATCHING TV, and FILMS???.
RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by Dilsy Manoj on Feb 17, 2007 03:56 PM Permalink
Don\'t talk bull sh-it u mohammed uddin - Could you tell me how the religion muslim originated.
It originated from Abrahams Illegitimate son ISHMAIL, from a SERVANT NAMED HAGER.
So dont boast about moslem religion it was borne and originated due to a BAS-TARD ISHMAIL.
RE:RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by mohammed uddin on Feb 17, 2007 05:31 PM Permalink
Hey which F***en Belief ur referring to, distorted and twisted one.go trough BIBLE BARNBAS,
RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by Koushik Rudra on Feb 17, 2007 10:25 PM Permalink
No words for you - you are great - you are the inspiration of all jihadis.. Well done..
RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by indranil banerjee on Feb 17, 2007 03:57 PM Permalink
hey pakistani mohammed uddin,how dare you call VANDE MATARAM a rubbish?
RE:RE:RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by mohammed uddin on Feb 17, 2007 05:33 PM Permalink
Hey indrani, dont pray left and right have some sense DO SACRIFISE LIFE FOR NATION but just dont start praying, as u do not call father to your neighbour, similarly do not pray any other ENTITY except the GOD JAI HIND JAI BHARAT
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by on Feb 17, 2007 03:12 PM Permalink
Can you tell me how many holidays are declared for Hindu festivals in Saudi Arabia.Uae,Quatar etc etc.Atleast in America U guys are allowed to pray and do what u like -but can other religious people do the same in Saudi Arabia?Please reply
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by Sonu Madhavan on Feb 17, 2007 03:20 PM Permalink
Dear Friend What about Laden and Umar Sharif oh! i forget how could you condem them they are your brother right That sucks
RE:RE:Truth about Aurangzeb
by indranil banerjee on Feb 17, 2007 03:21 PM Permalink
HEY BOSS. What about Osama Bin laden,Moolah Omar,Masood Azhar,Afzal Guru and muslim gods who have bombed in Mumbai Local train and other innocent indians.I think they are god to you muslims,you never condemn their activities.
Rediff is doing gr8 job by showing every now and than a hindutava face by putting such kind of article --- can't u people want a peace in our contry --- am not against showing or writing truth ---- but in the name of truth and above article you are simply fooling people --- where are the positive aspects of aurangzeb like he livelihood was based on his labor work of writing quran and making muslim praying caps .. he never used his sultanat money --- which of that time king has displayed such honesty including shivaji - akbar - maharana ---
so be honest in true means --- and dont try for this cheap publicity
RE:RSS FUNDED ARTICLE
by narender mattoo on Feb 17, 2007 03:09 PM Permalink
I fail to understand why people like you donot realise the real value of humanity and honesty. I strongly beleive that by making muslim caps for his lively hood was to put a mask over his cruel face. your being honest at home and cruel at the other religion public does not make you a religeous man.You being faithful to your religion does not give you a license to disrespect the other religion. If we can disown a man like Jaichand who was more faithful to his religion than Aurangzeb,why cannot you. You must learn to accept the truth even if it is bitter. I think this is the deviding line. The difference in understanding the real meaning of honesty & to be relgious
i am sorry to say but you people are having only one track mind, always try to find some one wrong and especially other religions and there kings are the favourite food esp- shivaji. dont ever dare to talk about shivaji maharaj he is in the highest league of its own and if you think about aurangazeb an liberal tolerant mughal then you must be joking. what positive you want to tell? a man who forcibly converted, killed and destroyed temples -you make him a hero. think twice before you put your statement, if one babri masjid can make all muslims feel hurt and make all hindus villains ;then what about all this destruction of temples. do you think we should praise for all these henious crime- think again !!!! remember people are not fools and they are well aware about this criminal named aurangazeb.
person who does BAD is bad either Hindu or a muslim and there is nothing wrog in pointing fingers to thos kind of persons like aurangazeb or Hitler..or whoever may be. onr thing is clear that our ancestors (may be britishers or earlier politicians or whoever may be) have MANIPULATED our History and many "Historical Villains" are presently shown as heros ( this might be because of dirty politicians to save their religious votebanks)
one of the good points mentioned above is "No street is named after Hitler in the West, yet in New Delhi we have Aurangzeb Road, a constant reminder of the horrors Aurangzeb perpetrated against Indians, including his own people" . It's true in INDIA that more Villians have importance rather than a hero.. My coclusion is that more of this kind of articles should come and people should know Actual History and Indian civilization...
RE:required some more articles of this king!!! thanks rediff
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 02:50 PM Permalink
ABOUT THE PRESENT, LET ME SEE YOU CONDEMN THIS...
URGENT NEWS: Government of Kazakhstan demolishes cottages in Hindu community
RE:required some more articles of this king!!! thanks rediff
by M Jameel on Feb 17, 2007 03:26 PM Permalink
if aurangzeb has destroyed temples & forcibly converted hindus then most of india would have been populated by muslims or in fact would have have been a muslim country. true!!!!!!!!
we cannot just go ahead & believe in the articles published by every tom, dick & harry.
may peace between hindus & muslims survive these monsters who try to divide us.
The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) did not destroy Jewish places of worship after the conquest of Khaibar, but he left them as they were. The Prophet's (Sallallahu Alaihi wa Sallam) companions did not destroy churches after conquering many countries. Such old places of worship exist at the present time.
Umar Ibn 'Abdul 'Aziz sent his officials the following: 'Do not destroy a church or synagogue or a temple of fire worshippers'.
No doubt,If Aurangazeb had destroyed temples, he has not followed the foot steps of prophet and he is not in the list of muslims.
RE:Is Aurangazeb Muslim? Is Advani/Modi Hindu ?
by V H on Feb 17, 2007 02:44 PM Permalink
Jee... you can't even keep ur religion out of the message board. Look all this PBUH and other SAWS.
RE:Is Aurangazeb Muslim? Is Advani/Modi Hindu ?
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 02:46 PM Permalink
ABOUT THE PRESENT, LET ME SEE YOU CONDEMN THIS...
URGENT NEWS: Government of Kazakhstan demolishes cottages in Hindu community
RE:RE:RE:Is Aurangazeb Muslim? Is Advani/Modi Hindu ?
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 02:56 PM Permalink
Why r u condemning me? if you people r so secular then let me see you say anything in support of the Kazakh Hindus.
RE:RE:RE:Is Aurangazeb Muslim? Is Advani/Modi Hindu ?
by Aniruddha Bose on Feb 17, 2007 03:44 PM Permalink
what you think ? if your religion suffers then everyone should support and for others they should suffer. thats the way you people are trained and you are no different but remember before using foul words - the same can be given back to you asshole... good work vishal carry on.
RE:RE:Is Aurangazeb Muslim? Is Advani/Modi Hindu ?
by navaz mytheen on Feb 17, 2007 03:21 PM Permalink
I strongly support not only the Kazak Hindus in this time of need, but also any people who require religious freedom .What our govt is doing????
The man Aurangzeb, who beheaded his own brother.. whats the collating factor between him distroying temples and torturing today's muslims and destroying mosques by Hindus today.. He may have been cruel, to all (not only to hindus)but why are today's leaders (Modi..etc) are acting cruel like him.. Moghal ruled hundreds of years.. over the period of time, all were not Aurangzeb, there were Akbars too.. If all were Aurangzeb we would not have been discussing this here..Things would have been TOTAL different.. POINT!!!
RE:RE:WHY.. Digging up the past...
by mahmood alam on Feb 17, 2007 03:47 PM Permalink
doosaron par ungali uthaoge to tumhari hi chaar ungaliyan tumhari taraf ishara karengi. what u want to hear yaar. When we should discuss about country's growth we are talking scrap.
What rediff is doing?
I think we have much more important issues to discuss. stop bullshitting guys.
RE:WHY.. Digging up the past...
by on Feb 17, 2007 03:24 PM Permalink
You mean giving special rights to Minorities far more than Majority is a sin?Or do you say What our great PM said-Muslims have first right on Indian Resources is not sufficient for you people.India is the only country wherein majority is subjucated when ruled earlier by minorities and now by the so called Secular majority!God save HIndus!
RE:WHY.. Digging up the past...
by V H on Feb 17, 2007 02:43 PM Permalink
How did Modi act cruel? Is it by giving treating everybody equal not providing special minority package to Muslims?
