India: Gunmen killed at Indian holy site(Muslims' attempted score-settling against Hindus)

BBC News ^ | 07/05/05

[TigerLikesRooster]

Last Updated: Tuesday, 5 July, 2005, 09:20 GMT 10:20 UK

Gunmen killed at Indian holy site

 

Police have ended an attack on a disputed religious site in northern India by killing all the assailants.

Indian Home Minister Shivraj Patil said five militants had been killed by the security forces, and another unidentified person was also killed.

In 1992, Hindu nationalists demolished a mosque at the site at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh state, sparking riots.

Islamic militants had recently threatened to target the complex, but no group has so far claimed the attack.

State of alert

The unidentified men forced their way into the heavily guarded site at about 0915 local time (0415 GMT).

Click here to see a map of the disputed site

They used a jeep loaded with explosives to blow a hole in the wall of the complex, and drove a car through the gap.

The gunmen were surrounded by armed police as they tried to enter the inner area of the complex, and a gun battle lasting nearly two hours followed.

A local official told the BBC that all the Hindu pilgrims and the religious structure were safe.

The destruction of the Babri mosque sparked nationwide riots

The driver of the men's vehicle has been arrested and is being questioned by police, who say they recovered three AK-47 assault rifles and hand grenades at the site.

Hindu leaders reacted angrily to Tuesday's incident.

India's main opposition Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) has called for country-wide protests, accusing the government of going soft on terrorism.

Party chief Lal Krishna Advani said the attack had brought what he termed the movement to build a Hindu temple at the site back to centre-stage.

Hindu nationalist group the Rashtriya Shyamsevak Sangh (RSS) appealed to the public to keep any protests peaceful.

A prominent Islamic scholar urged calm.

"No movement can succeed with violence," Maulana Wahiuddin said.

The town and state are on high alert and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh has called a cabinet meeting in Delhi to discuss the attack.

Religious bloodshed

The Ayodhya complex is one of the most disputed religious sites in the world, and one of the most heavily guarded places in India.

The complex is claimed by right-wing Hindus, who believe it is the birthplace of their Lord Ram.

The 16th century Babri mosque was destroyed 13 years ago by activists who believed it had been built upon an old Hindu temple.

The move prompted one of India's worst bouts of nationwide religious rioting between Hindus and the country's Muslim minority, which left more than 2,000 people dead.

The bloodshed was viewed as the most serious threat to India's secular identity since independence in 1947.

The dispute over the complex is still working its way through India's courts.

[muawiyah]

Kublai Khan was, however, a Mongol, and he made some decisions about where he thought the lines should be drawn between the Buddhists, Hindus, Christians and Moslems.

And those lines were drawn and that was that.

Hardly the sort of thing a petty plunderer would do.

BTW, the Mongols did conquer almost the entire known world.

[muawiyah]

Thanks for the reference on Sri Sankracharya. Just spent some time reading about the fellow. 'twould seem that the movement he initiated in or about 700 CE/AD would have been rolling back the Buddhists and Jains at the same time the Arabs, with their Islam, were beginning their march to the East.

Conflict was inevitable.

No wonder all those Jain and Buddhist Temples have been been overbuilt with Hindu temples and Moslem mosques.

[sukhoi-30mki]

Events related to disputed site at Ayodhya


http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=50093


PS-a lot of the resources relating to Ayodhya esp in the West are from a blatantly pro-Muslim point of view,while some are from real nauseating Hindu extremist groups,so one needs to be doubly sure of what he is looking for.

[monday]

"An old church building is just that ~ an old church building ~ nothing particular sacred about them."

Unless someone thinks there is. Religious people get funny notions about certain buildings. Telling them there is "nothing particular sacred about them", isn't going to change their minds.

[muawiyah]

Whatever you want to believe about a building, it's just a building. Ask it.

[desherwood7]

It sounds to me that India is having the same problems as the European Continent.

[little jeremiah]

When Muslims invaded India, they destroyed numerous temples (and other buildings) and built mosques on top of them. Or merely defaced them and destroyed the altars and shrines, and turned them into mosques. Sometimes claiming that they built them.

An interesting read in this connection is "Proof of Vedic Culture's Global Existence" by Stephen Knapp. Author needs an editor, but has a lot of surprising information.

I have no sympathy for the Muslims here. It just took the Hindus hundreds of years to get angry, as they are a rather peaceful people.

[sheik yerbouty]

Muzzies like to say that they have 1.2 billion people. That means there are nearly 5 billion non muzzies. At the least, they need math lessons.

[muawiyah]

Europe and India are very similar, both in terms of number of people, languages, and origins of most of the population (somewhere near the Black Sea in Turkey and Bulgaria).

Still, Europe has toilets and India has fewer toilets. If nothing else, that difference would wake you up a bit.

[muawiyah]

When the Moslems invaded India the Hindus got very angry and fought like crazy.

[little jeremiah]

Unfortunately they didn't fight hard enough.

I didn't mean that the kings and armies didn't fight, but the regular people have put up with a lot through the centuries. Perhaps too much.

[libertarian_indian]

Archaeological evidence proving that a temple existed exists. This was first published in Indian Express inthe 1980s. The evidence was by a renegade retired bureaucrat who leaked out the secrets of the government that was pandering to the Muslims. The whistleblower was a retired director of Archaeological Survey Of India (a government body that got the evidence and was ordered to suppress it).

The Supreme Court then refused to look for evidence. So the Hindus demolished the mosque by themselves.

Then the court woke up and ordered that a neutral body look at the evidence. Third party companies from USA participated in digging the evidence with representatives from both sides affixing their signature at every stage of the excavation. The evidence was overwhelmingly in favor of the claim that a temple existed. The Communist Indian media then went ballistic and asked, "So what if there is evidence? Muslims should get the place." This happened within the last 2 years.

[libertarian_indian]

You are a disgusting Communist to claim that Hindu means nauseating! Amazing way to support Mullahs!

[tkathy]

Whatever. Civilized people do not butcher over real estate. Civilized people do not butcher over anything.

[muawiyah]

You are disgusting Communist to forget English grammar so quickly.

You parsed that particular phrase, to wit: "real nauseating Hindu extremist groups as if it were written in Gujarati.

The way to read this is that there are "Hindu extremist groups" that are "real nauseating", and I'll guarantee that even the top echelon of BJP will agree with the writer about some of them!

"Real" modifes "nauseating", and "Real nauseating" modifies "groups", as does "Hindu", and "extremist".

Practice, practice, practice or you are going to be forever mortified by some of the subtle nuances of English, and everybody is going to be laughing at you.

[libertarian_indian]

The way to read this is that there are "Hindu extremist groups" that are "real nauseating"...

In case you did not know, the definition of "Hindu extremist groups" in India means those who oppose Islamic laws that force women who have been raped to marry the rapist.

The more fundamentalist a Hindu becomes, the more silent and withdrawn from society s/he becomes. This is unlike some religions where the more fundamentalist they become, they hijack planes and blast bombs in public.

You need to stop buying Communist propaganda when it comes to countries you know nothing about.

[muawiyah]

In America "Hindu extremist groups" means the guys who took a Christian missionary and his young sons out and burned them to death with automobile tires.

There are even worse groups, of course.

They may or may not object to Moslems, but that doesn't matter from the American Christian point of view.

In the meantime pay better attention to the way a series of adjectives is lined up to modify a noun IN ENGLISH. References from other languages won't cut it.

[libertarian_indian]

In America "Hindu extremist groups" means the guys who took a Christian missionary and his young sons out and burned them to death with automobile tires.

Perhaps this is the result of you blindly following what your liberal media tells you. The missionary was not burnt by any Hindu groups. The investigations proved that. He was involved in using violence to convert people to Christianity and when you attempt that with tribals, they retaliate in the only way they know.

The reason used to justify violence to convert people to Arabic faiths like Islam and Christianity is Deuteronomy, Chapters 12 and 13.

[Phsstpok]

Your prejudice shows in your selected screen name, but I'll try anyway. I don't expect to convince you, but I do hope to dispel any misinformation that you may try to spread.

Muslims are invaders in India. That is not a question for rational human beings. Any Muslim presence in India is the result of invasion, occupation and the destruction of the local religion and culture. To dispute that makes anyone out to be a liar and fundamentally evil, on the face of it.

There are hundreds of web sites referring to a 1,000 year old Hindu temple on this same site, not the least of which is Wikipedia. If that left wing bunch of pro Muslim wing nuts acknowledge this simple fact, who am I to disagree. However, a simple Google search turns up hundreds of such sites relating to over a century of "professionally excavated evidence" of the previous occupation of the site by those other than Muslims.

The question itself is a canard and an insult to reasoned discussion. Muslims routinely destroy all the evidence they can of previous cultures and religions. Witness what they are doing now on Temple Mount and the grotesque destruction of the ancient Buddhas in Afghanistan. Muslims can't very well actively destroy evidence of history and then challenge their accusers "show me the evidence." The evidence of their lies is their destruction of the evidence. Because of the actions of Muslims the test MUST be "prove to me that Muslims have any claims to this site... EVER."

And I second the notion that 500 year old buildings are gross nouveau impositions on the history of the Indian sub continent.

Of course, there is an answer to Muslims in India, and elsewhere in the world. Do to them what they do to others. Wipe them out. Erase them from history. It's only fair.

[muawiyah]

It's highly unlikely any American missionary would ever use "violence" to convert someone. American Protestant Christians don't do that, and you know better than to suggest they do. I'm surprised you didn't suggest he offered money since that's the other, but much more popular excuse so many Hindus use for violence and threats against American Christian missionaries.

The man did have weapons available for self-defense as do all the Hindu hotshots who visit that same area.

Now, were the "tribals" Hindu, or were they something else? Actually, that's a really, really, really difficult question to answer since so many Hindus seem, to us at least, as if they are filled with superstitition and folk belief to the exclusion of knowledge and coherent religious belief. I am sure you can explain to us how we can tell the difference between one of those "tribals" and a typical modern Hindu living in the wealthier sections of Mumbai.

BTW, Deuteronomy is actually NOT part of Christian belief. It's Jewish (and Jews are not Arabs ~ they are, in fact, according to DNA analysis, closely related to the Pashtoons in Afghanistan). They are the Aryans to whom Ram was sent at least 6 times, eh?!. Most brands of Christianity consider the Old Testament (which includes Deuteronomy) as a "guide", and not as a "rule". You could have asked almost any Christian about that if, in fact, you knew any Christians.

Now, back to the question of what Americans think an Hindu extremist group to be ~ if you don't like what we think, you are going to have to INFORM us of their precise nature, and without gratuitous insults and expressions of ignorance about our religion. Otherwise, we just might think that anybody in India who is not a Moslem, Sikh, Jain, Christian or Buddhist who kills a missionary is, in fact, an Hindu extremist.