During past ten years that I have been writing books, I have never approached any one (individual or organization) to review my works. Those who voluntarily sent their letters of appreciation or communicated it over phone, I have simply placed their feelings on record. Among them, many words of appreciations received over phone may have remained unrecorded.
Prof. G C Asnani, M.Sc., Ph.D. (retired from United Nations service), 822 Sindh Colony, Aundh, Pune 411 007, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Review published at http://www.hinduvoice.net
"This booklet shows the agony of a scholar who wants to present the truth before the public about the mess created in case of Shri Raam Mandir, Ayodhya. Now the facts have been covered under garbage in the name of secularism by so-called professors, academicians and men of justice, politicians and press. The write-up is straightforward, frank and honest. The Author, Shri Maanoj Rakhit, is telling the truth, the facts about Raam Mandir in Ayodhya, exposing the secular professors and men and women in high positions who have tried their best to cover up the truth about existence of Raam Mandir, which Muslims - true to the teachings of their religion - had demolished. It is worth reading." (see footnote
After publishing "Arise Arjun': Awaken My Hindu Nation" in March 2003, I had access to additional information "On Raam Temple Ayodhya". Blending the old and new information, restructuring the organization of entire subject matter, this work was published in Nov 2003.
The truth often lies behind the smoke screen
History is our past. Our present is built on our past. Our future will be built on our present. Past, present and future are interwoven. We cannot ignore any of them. History’s most important role is to record the facts as it is, and let the successive generations learn from it, as they may want to. But, history has been often used (or, abused) to suppress the facts, and/or to eclipse the facts by presenting a version more suited to the influential/ruling interests of that time.
When untruth is repeated again and again naming it as truth, it starts appearing as truth. Similarly, when truth is repeated again and again labeling it as untruth, it starts appearing to be untruth. History is full of such examples, but in our inertia, we want to maintain our apathy towards it. In our apathy, we let untruth take the position of truth. In this manner, we let it grow. When we do not recognize the untruth, then it makes its way deeper into our thoughts and actions. Our life then starts accepting it and gives it an acceptable place in our life. Then it works slowly like poison. From individual’s life it encompasses the nation’s life.
It may be interesting to know how it works around us, how subtle can be its ways, and how widespread are its instances. The truth often lies behind the smoke screen. The ability to penetrate through and look beyond is the need of the time.
What made me write this book?
I followed English media and they suppressed most of the facts on purpose
After reading this book you may want to ask yourself, how much of this you had known? As for me, I had not known, until a year ago, most of what I have written in this book. The reason is very simple. I followed the English news media and they suppressed most of the facts on purpose. You will find the evidence here. Western media followed what was reported in Indian English media. This is how most English educated people remained in dark.
These major newspaper-publishing houses also controlled most of the major vernacular news media
This was not all. These major newspaper-publishing houses also controlled most of the major vernacular news media. As a result, most major vernacular newspapers also followed the same practice of suppressing facts. You might wonder why should they do it? Answers will emerge as we will progress through this fact-finding series Knowledge is your strength, Ignorance curse.
Our government controlled television channels were also monitored by those people who had similar interests
Matters did not end here. Our government controlled television channels were also monitored by those people who had similar interests. Again, they too followed the same process of suppressing facts on purpose. Private television channels were not much there, in those days.
We were kept in dark about Ayodhya Evidence Debate
"The clear-cut result of the Ayodhya evidence debate is still not widely known. Most of the Indian English-language papers, as well as the official electronic media, have all along been on the side of the BMAC, and they have strictly kept the lid on this information. Their reporting on the scholars’ debate has been very partial and, from the moment the BMAC's defeat became clear, increasingly vague". Dr. Koenraad Elst, p187
Knowledge is for sharing
Most of us do not have time, energy and resources to undertake research into what has been hidden from us. I could do it only now because I have taken retirement from active service and the time of the day and the night is mine. I can study, I can dig, I can analyze, and I can connect what has happened and what is happening. I can now see through the whole game plan because I have worked non-stop 10 to 15 hours a day for almost a year. Knowledge is for sharing. I wish to share my newfound knowledge with those who are now in the same position as I was until about a year ago.
Academic Fraud and Politicized Scholarship
"Future historians will include the no-temple argument of the 1990s as a remarkable case study in their surveys of academic fraud and politicized scholarship. With academic, institutional and media power, a new academic-journalistic consensus has been manufactured denying the well-established history of temple demolition by Islamic iconoclasm to the Baabri Masjid-Raam Janm Bhoomi site, at least among people with prestige and influence but no first-hand knowledge of the issue. But the facts will remain the facts, and their ongoing suppression is bound to give way as new generations of scholars take a fresh look at the idea.” Dr. Koenraad Elst, p21-22
Western scholars, known for their independence, did not do their job in this case
“It is not reassuring to watch the ease with which foreign scholars have absorbed or adopted the non-temple thesis from their Indian colleagues (whom they assume to be neutral observers) even without being shown any positive evidence. In academic circles in the West, my own restating the status quaestionis in terms of actual evidence has only earned me hateful labels and laughter, and this from big professors at big universities whose prestige is based on the widespread belief that scholarship goes by hard evidence, not politically fashionable opinions. Never has any of them offered hard evidence for the newly dominant view, or even just shown a little familiarity with the contents of the debate.” Dr. Koenraad Elst, p20
Raam Mandir issue is only a small part of a much larger conspiracy
In this small book I shall cover only Raam Mandir issue but that actually is, only the tip of the iceberg. Howsoever strange it may sound, the fact of the case is that Raam Mandir issue is only a small part of a much larger conspiracy, which was initiated much earlier. The conspirators themselves were extremely well organized. You may want to think that whatever I am trying to imply here is rather far-fetched. You may even want to stop reading at this point but that would be your choice.
As for me, I shall provide ample evidence in this book itself, which will at least convince you that there has been a conspiracy. And yet, you may not be able to fully well visualize how this could be part of a much larger conspiracy. I shall establish my facts gradually, through a series of small books like this. The theme will be built up sequentially to reveal the whole game plan. But I can assure you of one thing that you will have plenty of evidence at each stage. And then, at each stage you can decide whether you would want to continue the journey with me till the end of it, or give up on the way itself. It all will depend on the kind of credibility I am able to build up with you.
A Word of Caution
Rama pronounced as रामा would mean in Sanskrit a woman of low origin which will not be proper address for the person whom we Hindus worship as an Avataar अवतार of Bhagawaan भगवान Vishnu विष्णु.
Ram pronounced as रैम would mean in English a male sheep and Christian missionaries love to pronounce it that way. Raam pronounced as राम simply eliminates these unintended distortions.
Many knowledgeable people constantly use it in print and thereby, directly or indirectly (intentionally or unintentionally), encourage the corruption in pronunciation of such a respectable word. I see no compelling reason to blindly copy Rama रामा or Ram रैम just because these are popular spellings or practiced by so-called learned people.
Raam राम is a divine term it is not only a name. It is uttered by most Hindus as the name of the God. We must be careful when we spell that name so that it is pronounced correctly.
Chapter 1 — 180,000 Hindus sacrificed lives to save Raam Mandir; should their sacrifice be wasted?
Not a single Hindu temple Surat to Delhi for 1,000 kilometers in the 18th century
A British traveller who journeyed from Surat to Delhi in the 18th century has recorded that throughout his journey he had never seen a single Hindu temple.
From Surat to Delhi, about thousand kilometers, not a small distance, not a single Hindu temple! Can you visualize that today? What could have made this happen? What happened to those temples?
Qur’an instructs each Muslim to destroy Hindu Mandirs with Idols or images
Qur'an 2:216 Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it.2
Qur'an 8:39 Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme.2
Qur'an 9:2-3 Allah will humble the unbelievers… Allah and His apostle are free from obligation to the idol-worshipper… Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers.3
Qur'an 9:7 Allah and His apostle repose no trust in idolaters.4
Qur'an 9:39 If you do not fight He will punish you sternly and replace you by other men.5
Quran 9.123, 29, 5 Surely the worst beasts in God's sight are the unbelievers. O ye who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers and let them find in you harshness. Humiliate the nonMuslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute. Then, when the sacred months are drawn away, slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them and confine them, and lie in wait for them at every place of ambush.6
Qur'an 60:4 We renounce you (i.e., the idolaters): enmity and hate shall reign between us until you believe in Allah only.4
Prophet Mohammed himself destroyed idols and what he did became ‘Sunna’ that must be followed by every Muslim for all the time to come
"When Prophet Mohammed appeared on the scene, Arabia was a multicultural country endowed with pagan shrines, churches, synagogues and Zoroastrian fire-temples.
When he died all the nonMuslims had been converted, expelled or killed and their places of worship laid waste or turned into mosques.
The truly crucial event was Prophet's entry into the Kaaba, the central shrine of Arabia's native religion, where he and his nephew Ali smashed the 360 idols with their own hands.
The Islamic account itself establishes that the model man Prophet Mohammed desecrated the Kaaba and forcibly turned it into a mosque, setting an example, particularly, for Mahmoud Ghaznavi, Aurangzeb and the Taliban to emulate.
In reality, Mohammed's conduct is the definitional standard of what it is to be a good Muslim".7
Hamilton reported Baabri Masjid was built with mortar mixed with blood and fat from Hindu corpses
That act of deliberate destruction and desecration has long been forgotten by Hindus. What has caused them agony is the destruction of a temple dedicated to Shri Raam. Are they to be blamed? ... The Babari Masjid was indeed built, as Hamilton reported "with mortar mixed with blood and fat from Hindu corpses".1
Cunningham recorded that 180,000 Hindus sacrificed their life
As for Raam Janm'Bhoomi Temple, Girish Munshi writes that it was at the instigation of two fakirs [Muslim monks] that Baabar ordered his General to attack it. The General was opposed by Raja Vijay Singh of Hansbar, Raja Sangraam Singh of Makariah and Raja Mohabat Singh of Bhiti. The British historian Cunningham was to write:
"Hindus united to face the attack on their Raam Janm'Bhoomi Temple. There were 180,000 casualties among Hindus. The number of casualties amongst Muslim is not known. In the end Meer Baqui used his canon to destroy the temple".1
Hindus are paying the price for respecting law
In any other country (need we mention names?) the government would have bulldozed the Masjid on its own, and put an end to discussion, cutting as it were, the Golden Knot. It is only in India which is a democracy that we argued endlessly, go to court and wait for justice that over four centuries has been deferred, first by British, then by Nehru. Hindus are paying the price for respecting law and not the truth. This is asking for trouble.1
What is happening today in Australia, New Zealand, and the Americas?
Today, judges and governments in Australia, New Zealand and the Americas are increasingly conceding the right of indigenous communities to restart worship at their sacred sites ... Against the near-universal consensus that all sacred sites are to be respected, Islam is taking the position that it has the right to occupy and desecrate the sacred sites of other religions.8
Chapter 2 — Double Standards
Why no one makes noise when, even today, Muslims themselves, or Saudi Government, or Pakistani Government, or Chinese Government, or Israeli Government, or Burmese Buddhists demolish real Mosques?
Our people make so much noise about Hindus pulling down Baabri structure, which was not used as a mosque (place of Muslim worship) since 1936 and our Fake-Secular historians are at the forefront making lot of hullabaloo. Why they maintain deadly silence when Muslims themselves, in their own countries, pull down real mosques which are places of Muslim worship? In case of Ayodhya, Hindus pulled down a place of Hindu worship (not a place of Muslim worship), which happened to be known as Baabri Structure, and that too, only after waiting for 42 years helplessly watching our Courts use judiciary for political games. We will come to that soon.
12 December 2001 – Saudis bulldozed Hadum Mosque
The Shia News reports from Kosovo during Balkan crises mention about how Saudi Aid workers bulldozed the mosque, and the Koran school in Djakovica, Kosovo on 12 December 2001. 
Is this not interesting? Here Islam is not violated - why? What happened to our champions of secularism (about whom we will read a lot afterwards in this book itself)? Why are there no serial bomb blasts all over Saudi like they performed in Mumbai in 1993?
Andras Riedlmayer, Harvard University Fine Arts librarian, and coauthor of a survey of Kosovo's war-damaged architectural sites, is outraged by the Saudi demolition program. Riedlmayer added that the Saudis began by trying to break down the Ottoman-era gravestones in the cemetery of the Hadum Mosque. 
June 2002 – Governor Nur Misauri demolished Central Mosque
In June 2002, the capital Jolo of the Autonomous region of Sulu, somewhere in South-East Asia, the Governor Nur Misauri ordered the demolition of a local mosque. The Jolo Central Mosque, where past and present traditional leaders, including incumbent public officials, started their religious formation, was one of the landmarks on their island-province. 
Here we see demolition of a significant mosque, not just any ordinary mosque. And yet, Muslims themselves did not hesitate doing it. Why then our secularists have had so much heartburn over Babari structure, which was not even a proper mosque, not a place Muslim worship for 56 years? Why our prominent media instigated Indian Muslims so much, pouring articles after articles, in condemnation of Hindu society? Answers to these will emerge through our future publications when we will deal with the true character of the secularists after presenting ample evidence and after analyzing their ideology.
January 2003 – Pakistani Government demolished mosque
The Dawn, Pakistani newspaper reported this January that in Islamabad the government authorities demolished an under construction mosque, as the plot on which it was being built was reserved for park. 
Here we see that a park was more important than a mosque in a Muslim country, and that too in a country like Pakistan. This requires a special mention because till today many Muslims in BhaaratVarsh think that Pakistan is their real country. That is why when Pakistan cricket team lost, Indian Muslim mob attacked Hindus celebrating the victory of Indian cricket team (Bangalore). That is how Pakistani Muslim terrorists are able to find shelter with, and necessary information from, Indian Muslims to attack Hindu temples like AksharDhaam (2002) and conduct serial bomb blasts in city like Mumbai (25 August 2003 is the latest instance).
Aurangzeb demolished Golconda Jama Masjid
Aurangzeb has been notorious in Indian history for destroying Hindu temples as recorded by the historians of Islam. It is a different thing that Marxist historians of JNU and AMU whitewashed that history after taking control of NCERT, ICHR. It may however, come as a surprise to many that this champion of Islam, Mogul Emperor Aurangzeb, himself ordered demolition of a mosque.
The Islamic Milli Gazette reports that the vassal of Golconda had been collecting revenue from the vassalage for years without depositing it in the Mogul treasury. To squirrel away Crores of rupees thus illegally kept, he buried the loot and built a huge mosque over it. To retrieve the money, Aurangzeb got the mosque demolished. 
Here we see that the money was more important than a Jama Masjid, which was a place of worship.
1920 Madina – Ibn Saud destroyed Janat ul Baqi Mosque
The famous Janat ul Baqi Mosque in Medina was destroyed by Ibn Saud's Wahabi regime in 1920. 
It seems if Muslims destroy Mosques, which are in use as mosque, it is acceptable to our FakeSecularists and Indian Muslims but if a structure bearing name of Baabar who came here for loot and genocide, and such structure which has been abandoned by Muslims for past 56 years and such structure which is in use by Hindus as a temple for past 44 years, if such structure is pulled down by Hindus, our secularists (under cover Marxist intellectuals) consider it a big blow to their brand of Secularism!
9 October 2001 – Chinese Government demolished Doeng Mosque
On October 9, 2001 about 100 people from the local government of Quaraqash District, Hotan Prefecture, the committee on religious affairs, and Public Security demolished a large mosque called “Doeng Meschit” in the Western part of China, wherein Islamic fundamentalism is growing and the demand of a Turkistan is growing. The Chinese authorities explained that the mosque was destroyed because of its proximity to an elementary school. 
The beauty about Muslims is that they can never live in peace with any other community anywhere in the world. It is very important for the humanity to understand clearly (without any sugar-coating that essentially leads to self-deception) what Islam stands for and what it prescribes for the rest of the humanity. The ignorance of this has been the curse for Hindu society.
Israel demolished foundations of a mosque in Nazareth
Israel demolished the foundations of an unauthorized mosque near a Christian holy site in Nazareth. The construction of the mosque, on a plot next to the Basilica of the Annunciation, has been a source of tension between Christians and Muslims in the city in recent years. 
Our Pope supports that because it was a tussle between Christians and Muslims, but the same pope opposes Raam Janm’Bhoomi Mandir because it is a tussle between Hindus and Muslims. It seems that Pope also has same double standard as those MarxistCommunist intellectuals.
Many mosques destroyed in Buddhist Burma
In Burma, the following mosques were destroyed: Kyaikdon (the inside of the mosque and the Muslim school destroyed, Muslims expelled unless they became Buddhist); Gaw Bay (Mosque destroyed); Naw Bu (Mosque destroyed and all the villagers were expelled); Day Nga Yin (Mosque destroyed); Kyaung Don (Mosque destroyed, villagers allowed to stay); Kaninbu (Mosque and the Muslim school destroyed). 
Buddhists threw out Muslims, demolished their Madarsaas, Mosques. They have understood what Islam is like.
But our Sonia Gandhi has different views:
Sonia Gandhi: We will not however rest until all the guilty are brought to book. This is a struggle that must continue. 
Over 10 years have passed but Sonia wants the fire to be on, so that people can keep fighting over it. She is reminding them that I am with you; don’t forget this, simply because it happened over some 10 years ago. I will keep the heat on for you. You just have to keep fighting, that’s all I want. Her point of view is very simple:
- It does not matter that in last few years, hard core Muslims of Saudi Arabia may not have hesitated demolishing a mosque, a Muslim nation Pakistan may not have hesitated demolishing a mosque, China and Israel may not have hesitated demolishing a real mosque.
- It matters that she must keep Hindu Muslims continue to fight over a structure, which has ceased to be a mosque almost 60 years ago. It matters to her because this is how she can get Muslim votes.
Chapter 3 — Hindus did not demolish a place of Muslim worship: No Namaaz was offered there!
Baabri Mosque was NOT a place of Muslim Worship since British days and therefore, should not be called Baabri Mosque but it should be called Baabri Structure
On December 6, 1992 the Baabri Mosque was demolished. 10 years later, many people believe that Hindus demolished a place of Muslim worship.
This is simply not true because Hindus did not demolish a place of Muslim worship. Though the structure was known as Baabri Masjid no Namaaz was offered there for at least past 56 years, which is not a small period of time.
Mention of name Baabri Masjid is misleading, Baabri structure could be more appropriate
The mention of the name Baabri Masjid is misleading because it gives the impression it was in use as a Masjid, which Hindus pulled down. No, it was not in use as a Muslim Masjid since British days in 1936.
It was in use as a Hindu temple for 44 years
On the contrary it was in use as a Hindu temple for past 44 years, when it was pulled down. The structure may have been known as Baabri Masjid but it was in use as a Hindu Temple since 1949, that is, for past 44 years continually, which is not a small period either.
Why this fact should not be adequately publicized?
If Hindus pulled down a structure that was in use as a Hindu temple, so that a magnificent temple can be built in its place, why this information should not be adequately publicized?
Affidavits by Muslim residents of Ayodhya
"A court ruling of 1951 cites testimony of local Muslims that the mosque had not been used since 1936, which means that in 1949 the Hindus took over an unused building… On March 3, 1951, the Civil Judge of Faizaabaad observed: It further appears from a number of affidavits of certain Muslim residents of Ayodhya that at least from 1936 onwards the Muslims have neither used the site as a mosque nor offered prayers there…nothing has been pointed to discredit these affidavits..." Dr. Koenraad Elst, p168-169
Why then wrong impression has been broadcasted?
What does this tell us? That it was not a place of Muslim worship. Muslims have neither used the site as a mosque nor offered prayers there. Why then the wrong impression has been broadcasted that Hindus have pulled down a mosque? Why? Was it on purpose?
It says it was an unused building. It says that Hindu took over the unused building long before. Were these facts insignificant?
Why the public had not been told about them in sufficient detail with sufficient coverage that it goes down the public memory? Whose interests would have been ill served if these facts were well known to all concerned?
Bill in the Legislative Council of U. P. in 1936-37
"Prof. B. P. Sinha claims to know how this disuse of the Masjid came about: As early as 1936-37, a bill was introduced in the legislative council of U. P. to transfer the site to the Hindus (…) the bill was withdrawn on an unwritten understanding that no Namaaz [be] performed..." Dr. Koenraad Elst, p169n
What does this mean? In British days the matter was sorted out whereby it was principally accepted that the site was meant for Hindus, then why so much hullabaloo today?
Some people seems to have made it point to abuse Hindu interests at any cost with total disregard to all ethics.
Hindus wanted to give the Baabri structure proper temple architecture
"Since 1949, the building is effectively in use as a Hindu temple, but many Hindus, and especially the Vishw Hindu Parishad (VHP), want to explicate the Hindu function of the place with proper Hindu temple architecture, which implied removing the existing structure." Dr. Koenraad Elst, p148-149
What does this tell us? That it was not a place of worship for Muslims at least for past 56 years when the structure was pulled down in 1992.
That the building was in use as a Hindu temple for past 44 years and the structure was pulled down in 1992 to replace it with formal Hindu temple architecture.
Did Press & TV discharge their responsibility fully?
Were these facts insignificant?
Was the media (Press and Television) right in not giving them deserved publicity?
What were the results?
It divided Hindus with a feeling of guilt
It antagonized Muslims that Hindus destroyed their place of worship
It created a wrong world-opinion about Hindus
It served anti-Hindu elite very well who have remained determined to subvert Hinduism in every possible way they could.
Did the popular media act in the larger interest of
The media is the opinion-maker for the nation and the world at large.
Did they discharge their responsibility well in not educating the people fully?
Are they not answerable to the people of the nation?
Chapter 4 — Justice delayed is Justice Denied
Supreme Court Decided NOT to Decide but no one tells us that
Often we see politicians making public statement on Raam Temple issue: 'we should abide by Supreme Court decision'. Impression it creates that Supreme Court gave a decision on Raam Temple issue. No one cares to elaborate what that decision was. Not even media. Politicians do not because they have vested interest but why not popular media? Do they also have vested interest?
Justice M Rama Jois was the Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court. His comment was very simple:
Justice M Rama Jois: The Supreme Court decided not to decide.
I cannot believe that politicians do not know that, nor can I believe that media does not know that. But do all people know that? Has the Press made it clear, beyond doubt, in the minds of the people in general?
Comments of retired Chief Justice M Rama Jois
Justice M Rama Jois: “Decide not to decide” the crucial question referred for its opinion by the President of India under Article 143 of the Constitution, is the sum and substance of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Special Reference No 1/1993 made under Article 143(1) of the Constitution in which the President sought the opinion of the Supreme Court on the following question: Whether a Hindu Temple or any Hindu religious structure existed prior to the construction of the Raam Janm'Bhoomi-Baabri Masjid (including the premises of the inner and outer courtyards of such structure) in the areas on which the structure stood? 
Supreme Court Judgment Para 100 (11)
I looked at the Supreme Court judgment. There were two judgments, a majority judgment and a minority judgment. Here is the majority judgment and the minority judgment:
Para 100 (11) We very respectfully decline to answer it and return the same. 
Para 100(11) of the Judgment signed by Chief Justice of India M N Venkatachaliah, Justice J S Verma and Justice G N Ray together signed this judgment on 24 October 1994 at New Delhi.
Supreme Court Judgment Para 165
Para 165 The Presidential Reference is returned respectfully, unanswered. 
Para 165 of the Judgment signed by Justice A M Ahmadi and Justice S P Bharucha on 24 October 1994 at New Delhi.
People must know the whole truth
What does this say? That they decided nothing! So what are the politicians and the media telling the public?
Are they telling the public the whole truth?
Are they telling only that much of the truth as much suits their specific purpose?
Effectively, aren't they misguiding the public?
Public must know the truth and the whole truth.
Media has the responsibility to bring that to public.
If they do not, people must speak up! That would be
the easiest thing to say. But how will the people speak up?
Do they have a platform from where they can speak? Do they have the bare facts so that they know what to speak?
Judges sex scandal
Coming to the Supreme Court judgment it is quite interesting to look at the following comments of a later day Supreme Court Chief Justice:
““While expressing deep anguish over the manner in which media linked the judges to the [sex] scandal without any basis, the Chief Justice said, “I could not sleep for many days. I was so disturbed… I am anguished that the media has behaved totally irresponsibly.” Source: The Free Press Journal, 29 March 2003, p 3 column 3-4
When it hurts us then we cry
Well, well, when it hurts us then we cry. The Chief Justice of India could not sleep for many days. Why? Because it was hurting the Judiciary: the institution that they belonged to. Naturally, they had their affinity and loyalty towards that institution. The result: they saw to it almost immediately and acting very quickly that their institution was given a clean chit.
Did the Supreme Court discharge its responsibility fully?
But the sentiments of 80% population of this nation - the Hindus - were not important to them. So they took 42 years to decide at nothing, simply nothing. And then 8 more years have passed and they did nothing. Why? Because it is not hurting them: not the institution of judiciary. To them the feelings of millions and millions of Hindus are not important and those must be toyed with. They must be shunted around. Total 50 [42+8] years is nothing much for that kind of game playing.
Was it the whole truth?
When I had read Chief Justice's anguish a month ago and also read the news that judges were not guilty, I was not quite satisfied because some judges were accused and some other judges were investigating. Investigating judges had two conflicting responsibilities.
- One: to deliver the truth. /li>
- TTwo: to bear in mind that the reputation of the entire judiciary was at stake.
Assuming that the result of such investigation tainted the image of judiciary what would they do? It would be anybody's guess but without proof nothing can be said, and at times proof can be bought over. The doubt was confirmed a month later by this editorial comment:
More recently, the Mysore sex scandal involving Karnataka High Court judges had brought into disrepute the entire institution of judiciary. Despite an internal enquiry, the matter was hushed up. If any of the errant judges had been punished, the public was yet to be told about it. The point is if the judges behave in such an egregious manner the people at large can have little faith in the independence of the judiciary. Editorial, The Free Press Journal, 2 May 2003, p 4
If they can, can we not?
While delivering its judgment (or no judgment) Supreme Court sat on judgment about Hindu society and passed its strictures. Can we, the people, not sit on judgment about the conduct of the Supreme Court if it errs? Courts of Justice? Very doubtful, indeed!
Misuse of Courts for Political Games for 42 yrs.
Considering the foolish haughtiness with which the Allahabad High Court had just decided, days before gathering scheduled for 6 December to postpone once more their verdict on the acquisition of some of the Ayodhya land by the UP Government (intended as part of a strategy towards a peaceful solution), after a full 42 years of endless litigation, it is not fair to accuse the overenthusiastic Raam devotees of disrespect towards the judicial process and the democratic order which it is supposed to uphold. Rather, they have shown disrespect towards the misuse of the courts for political games, and they have rightly revolted against the judges' contempt for Hindu society, which was evident from their unwillingness to settle the dispute brought before them, concerning no less a site than the Raam Janm Bhoomi. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 129
Think about these comments
Come to think of it, an outsider like Dr. Koenraad Elst, who has no personal religious sentimental attachments to the issue, but who has studied the scenario himself, on site, says so. And he says so in exasperation looking at the gross abuse of judiciary. Then think of those who have been victim of all this game. How would you expect them to react?
Judiciary's sense of responsibility
Baabri Mosque structure was not in use as a mosque since 1936 but it was in use as Hindu temple since 1949. Hindus wanted it to have proper Hindu temple architecture and they had approached the Courts of Law for necessary permission. What did Courts do with it? In what manner did the Courts manage the nationally sensitive issue?
Let us see what kind of sense of responsibility our national judiciary has towards a critical issue facing the nation. Let us see whether they demonstrated the necessary capability to deliver justice.
Judiciary's responsibility towards the nation
National judiciary has certain responsibility towards the nation. A nation that comprises of 80% Hindus is essentially a Hindu nation. It is a different thing that Nehru gave it the name 'secular nation'. We have seen in Arise Arjun that the term 'secular' has been thoroughly abused by Nehru himself and all those in power to effectively give it a new meaning 'anti-Hindu'.
Now the point is that a nation, which comprises of an overwhelming majority of Hindus, its interests cannot lie outside Hindu interests. So what has the national judiciary done with that interest of people who effectively represent the Bhaaratiya nation?
Allahabad High Court itself passed the stricture in 1955
I am sure they cannot argue that they did not have enough number of judges or enough competent judges to decide on the subject. The Allahabad High Court itself passed the stricture in 1955 about the laxity of judiciary in this context and then they themselves went on to sleep for 10 times longer period. /p>
““It is very desirable that a suit of this kind is decided as soon as possible, and it is regretted that it remains undecided after four years.” The Allahabad High Court speaking in 1955 about the Raam Janm Bhoomi cases, which had by then been pending already for four years. The Ayodhya Reference: Arun Shourie, p vii
Allahabad High Court's own conduct for next 37 years
Let us compare this comment of Allahabad High Court with its own conduct for the next 37 years and see whether they meant what they said, and we will learn that they did not mean it, they simply said it like politicians do but never mean what they say.
Even in July 1992 the hearings were still going on. When the Kar'Seva began in July 1992 the Supreme Court said that if the UP Government could stop the KarSeva the Supreme Court would transfer the acquisition cases to itself and decide them all together. The KarSeva was stopped. But the Supreme Court eventually decided not to take over the cases …it stressed however that the High Court should expedite the hearings and decides the case expeditiously. KarSeva was set for 6 December 1992. The High Court concluded its hearings on 4 November 1992. The UP Government and others repeatedly requested it to deliver its judgment, one-way or the other. To no avail; instead, one of the judges proceeded on leave. The structure was demolished on 6 December 1992. The High Court delivered its judgment on 11 December 1992. The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgment and Commentaries, Arun Shourie, p viii-ix
Who will judge a Judge who does something wrong so gravely?
What does this tell us? Justice delayed Justice denied! Why did one of the judges have to proceed on leave at crucial juncture without delivering the judgment though the hearings had been concluded and with a clear understanding that the judgment must be delivered before the deadline set for it? Was this done on purpose? What was the motivation? Should that not be thoroughly investigated and punished?
These are the judges who judge us when we do something wrong. Who will judge them when they do something wrong? Are they beyond justice that they must not be judged? Who pays their fat salaries? We do, common people, from our hard earned money by way of taxes. Don't we have the right to question these judges who play games with the judiciary?
Did Supreme Court keep its promise?
First it was the Supreme Court, which promised that if KarSeva were stopped then they would themselves settle the issue. After the KarSeva was stopped they simply went back on their word like politicians often do. Then backing out on their promise they shunted it back to the Allahabad High Court as if it was a game of Ping-Pong.
Compare it with Hindu Justice System
How does it compare, for a change, with the justice of which foreign visitors spoke so highly about Hindu Society? Let us go back to Arise Arjun the first chapter 'Testimonies of Foreign Visitors'. We need to remember that was the system of justice as promulgated and practiced by Hindu Society for over two millenniums.
Max Muller: It is extremely strange that whenever, either in Greek, or in Chinese, or in Persian, or in Arab writings, we meet any attempts at describing the distinguishing features in the national character of the Indians (*Hindus), regard for Truth and Justice should always be mentioned first. Ref: INDIA what can it teach us? p 50
But what we witness today is Christianized Judiciary, product of Christian Missionary Education system imposed on us six generations ago. Judicial system derived from the Christian World, a third-rate judicial system that delivers judgment but fails to deliver justice!
Commitment (or treachery?) by Muslim leaders
Let us now look at how Muslim leaders stood by their commitment and how Supreme Court dealt with the matter:
As Muslim leaders had said that if it could be shown that a temple had existed at the site before the mosque was built, they would themselves advise Muslims to hand over the site to the Hindus, Shri Chandra Shekhar's Government identified this as the core question to be settled: Was there a Hindu structure at the site before the mosque was built? Barring holidays and the summer vacation, five judges of the Supreme Court heard the case three days a week from February to September 1994. And, alas! In the end they decided not to answer the Reference at all. Source: The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgment and Commentaries, Arun Shourie, p ix-x
3,000 judge-hours they spent for nothing
Look at the enormous time they spent at the cost of we common people's money [taxes] and in the end they delivered a big zero, worth nothing! 5 judges for 8 months, equivalent 3,000 judges-hours [assuming they all enjoyed 1 month summer vacation out of 8 months; so we see 5 judges x 7 months x 4 weeks/month x 3 days/week x 7 hours/day = about 3,000 judge-hours]
Why they ignored so much evidence on hand?
Several questions hit one at once. Evidence of various kinds and of unanswerable authenticity showed that the question that the President had referred to the Supreme Court deserved but one answer: Yes, there was a temple at the site. Would the Court have returned the question unanswered had the evidence weighed as heavily on the other side – if it was as clear from it that there had been no temple at the site? Is it really the case that … the judges, not being specialists in these fields, could not adjudge the evidence? Do they not routinely weigh evidence on matters on which they are not specialists – they are not surgeons, yet they decide whether a surgeon has been negligent; they are not experts in aviation, yet they affix responsibility for a crash; they are not irrigation engineers, yet they apportion river waters between the states; they are not technologists, yet they determine what effects some change in the location or technology of a refinery shall have, on its economics, its throughput, on the environment. Similarly, courts – the Supreme Court in particular – routinely ask experts to assist them. Could the judges not have sought the assistance of experts this time round? In any case, was the evidence all that complicated? What sort of evidence would the Court have encountered had it examined the question? Source: The Ayodhya Reference: Arun Shourie, p x-xi
Planting a time bomb for the future
The case got nowhere after being knocked about the courts for 42 years. Will the decision to send them back to the same courts help solve the problem, or does it amount to planting a time bomb for the future? The Ayodhya Reference: Arun Shourie, p xi
10 years have passed since then
10 years have passed since then and courts have not found time to decide on the issue. Finally, VHP gave its ultimatum and gave 23 February 2003 deadline for resolving the Ayodhya issue. The judges again waited until just one day before the deadline. On 22 February The Free Press Journal reported on its front page that the Supreme Court has once again fixed the date as 6 March 2003 for hearing on the plea of the government to vacate its interim order banning all religious activities in the 67 acres of acquired land around the disputed site.
Incredible are their ways
Isn't it incredible that they all had to wait until one day before the deadline and then declare that they would start looking at it a week later? In any case, whenever they start looking at it how many decades more will they take to deliberately keep postponing the nationally sensitive crucial issue?
We are Supreme - We care NOT
Is it that they are saying: we are Supreme as our name itself suggests and we care not of national sentiments and the sentiments of 80% of Bhaaratiya population for we happen to be the judiciary placed above all! We have already taken over 50 years to think about the matter, so what, it is our prerogative because it is we that have to deliver the decision and we can take hundreds of years if we wish. Look at this Fake-Secular Judiciary and compare it with what foreigners have documented about Hindu sense of justice right from 404 BC till 18th-19th century (see 1st chapter of Arise Arjun).
Modern judiciary has lot to learn from the old Hindu judiciary system
Max Muller: It is extremely strange that whenever, either in Greek, or in Chinese, or in Persian, or in Arab writings, we meet any attempts at describing the distinguishing features in the national character of the Indians (*Hindus), regard for Truth and Justice should always be mentioned first. INDIA what can it teach us? Max Muller, p 50
You will find that today's modern judiciary has lot to learn from the ancient Hindu judiciary system! No wonder Koenraad Elst calls it 'misuse of the courts for political games'. It is nothing but mockery of Justice which is a crime in itself.
When will the patience run out?
How long can humans hold their patience when everyone seems to have been conspiring in one way or other against the Hindus who had been tolerant for ages? Now let us proceed to look at how our reputed academics and media together had been cheating on us.
Chapter 5 — Media, supposedly 'The Opinion-makers' to the nation!
Evidence indicate that Prof Shereen Ratnagar and Times of India are deliberately promoting Untruth even Today
Once people have interiorized a certain framework of interpretation, they become capable of disregarding obvious facts, which do not fit their schemes. Source: Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 73
False accusation by Shereen Ratnagar
Ten years after the demolition of the Baabri Masjid, many archaeological experts have remained mum instead of critically looking at the issue, said Shereen Ratnagar, prominent Mumbai-based archaeologist and former professor of Archaeology at the Center for Historical Research, Jawaharlal Nehru University. Source: The Times of India, 24 Dec 2002, p 2
The topic continued further and it went on creating an impression in lay reader’s mind that there was hardly any archaeological evidence worth its name that could indicate prior existence of a temple at so-called Baabri Mosque site. Let us see how much of this claim is true and also let us see what the leading newspaper does when it is presented the very next day with factual information that contradicts such false statement.
Evidence listed by Dr. S. P. Gupta former Director of the Allahabad Museum
S P Gupta: It is indeed a great pity that the Supreme Court had declined to examine the evidence on the question which had been referred to it by the President [of India]. Had it deigned to study it, it would have found it conclusive, and its imprimatur would have gone a long way towards quieting the claptrap of Secular academics. In brief, the position is as follows. Source: Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgment and Commentaries, p 112
Excavations by Prof BB Lal
S P Gupta: From 1975 through 1980, the Archeological Survey of India under the Directorship of Prof B B Lal, a former Director General of the Survey, undertook an extensive program of excavation at Ayodhya, including the very mound of the Raam Janm Bhoomi [*Shri Raam's birth place] on which the so-called Janm'Sthaan Masjid [*birth place Mosque] or Baabri mosque once stood and later demolished on 6th December 1992. Source: The Ayodhya Reference: p 112
3,000-year-old Township, Hindu icons, pillar-bases of the pre-16th century demolished-temple
S P Gupta: At Ayodhya Prof Lal took as many as 14 trenches at different places in order to ascertain the antiquity of the site. It was then found that the history of the township was at least 3000 (three thousand) years old, if not more, and that at Raam Janm Bhoomi there stood a huge structure on a parallel series of square pillar-bases built of several courses of bricks and stones. He also found a doorjamb carved with Hindu icons and decorative motifs of Yaksh, Yakshi, Kirtimukh, Poornaghatt, double lotus flowers etc. Lal's excavations also established that the pillared structure underwent repeated repairs, at least three times. Lal's excavations also showed the existence of a huge fortification wall at the back of Raam Janm Bhoomi, built of burnt bricks, and going as far back in time as 3rd century BC. It is a common knowledge that in archaeology there is always an element of luck – one may just miss a treasure by inches. Prof Lal had a hard luck at Raam Janm Bhoomi. His southern trenches missed a huge pit with 40 and odd sculptures just by 10 to 12 feet. But he did get the pillar-bases of the pre-16th century demolished-temple, which others did not get. Source: Ayodhya Reference: pp. 112-113
Examinations by Dr. Y D Sharma & Dr. S P Gupta Evidences from 10th-12th centuries
S P Gupta: On the 2nd of July 1992 another team of archaeologists, consisting of Dr Y D Sharma, a former Deputy Director General of the Survey, Dr. S P Gupta, a former Director of Allahabad [Allah'Aabaad] Museum, and several other senior archaeologists went to the site of Raam Janm Bhoomi. This team went to examine the 40 and odd art and architectural fragments of an ancient Hindu temple which had been found there in an ancient pit by the officials of the Government of Uttar Pradesh who were engaged in leveling the ground on the eastern and the southern flanks of the Raam Janm Bhoomi, and which had been reported widely in the newspapers from the 18th June 1992. The team found that the objects were datable to the period ranging from the 10th through the 12th century AD, i.e., the period of the Late Pratihaars and Early Gadhvaals. The kings of these two dynasties hailing from Kannauj had ruled over Avadh [*Ayodhya] and eastern Uttar Pradesh successively during that period. These objects included a number of Aamalakas, i.e., the cogged-wheel type architectural element which crown the Bhoomi Shikhars or spires of subsidiary shrines, as well as the top of the spire of the main Shikhar or pyramidal structure built over the Garbh'Grih or sanctum sanctorum in which the image of the principal deity is kept and worshipped. This is characteristic feature of all north Indian temples of the early medieval period and no one can ever miss it – it is there in the Orissa temples, such as Konark, in the temples of Madhya Pradesh such as Khajuraaho and in the temples of Rajasthan such as Osian. Nearly a month after the demolition of the disputed structure, on 1st January 1993 to be exact, an identical Aamalaka was found in a pit dug by the U P officials in the presence of the SSP [*Senior Superintendent of Police] Faizabad when they were engaged in erecting a fresh barricade round the temple… The images of ChakrPurush, ParashuRaam, MaitriDevi, Shiv and Paarvati, etc. provide further proof to their being members of a 10th-12th century Hindu temple-complex. Source: The Ayodhya Reference: pp. 113-114
Evidences from 10th-16th and 1st-3rd centuries
S P Gupta: The team of archaeologists at a subsequent date undertook a couple of exploratory trenches at the eastern periphery of the Janm Bhoomi site, and also scraped more than 10 feet thick eastern and southern sections which had been cut across the Janm Bhoomi mound by the Government officials. It located a huge deep pit in which… it also found the remains of at least three rammed floors datable to three different phases of the time-bracket between 10th and 16th centuries, and one floor of the Kushaan period (1st-3rd century). Two walls built of several courses of burnt-bricks belonging to the Kushaan period also came to light. A huge and sprawling flooring of burnt bricks was located by Prof B R Grover. [p 115]
Evidence from 11th-12th and 9th-10th centuries
S P Gupta: The discovery of a number of Kushaan period terracotta images of gods and goddesses earlier made it clear, first, that at the Janm Bhoomi site Hindu temples were built several times during the last 2000 years with the interval of only about 450 years, from 1528 through 1992, when the Muslims destroyed the temple and occupied the site and also built a new structure they called Janm'Sthaan Masjid [*place of birth Mosque] in their own records; secondly, that the last time a huge stone temple was built at the site is to be dated between 11th and 12th centuries on the basis of the art and the style of sculptures, even though on the basis of the style of some weathered sculptures, it can safely be said that a stone temple of the 9th-10th century, belonging to the Pratihaar style, must have been present at this very place when during the Gadhvaal period a new and magnificent temple was attempted. In fact, it was, in a sense, Jirnoddhaar [*renovation, facelift]. [p 115]
Please pay attention to the words “they called ‘Janm’Sthaan Masjid’ in their own records”
Please ask yourself: why did Muslim call it “Place of Birth Mosque” in their records? Whose place of birth? Your? Mine? Baabar’s? Mir Baqui’s? Whose? Obviously, Shri Raam’s – any doubt?
Evidences from Baabar’s General Mir Baaqi
S P Gupta: And finally, that the temple was destroyed sometimes after 13th century AD, in every likelihood in the early 16th century, as is fully borne out by the inscriptions of Mir Baqi found fixed in the disputed structure far back in time, during British days as is clear from the accounts given by Mrs. A Beveridge in her translation of Babur-Nama published in 1926. Source: The Ayodhya Reference: p 115
Leading archaeologists of the country met at Ayodhya to examine the archaeological evidences and arrived at the same conclusion
S P Gupta: Now what do the archaeologists say? In order to seek the opinion of leading archaeologists of the country on all these issues and also to give them an opportunity to see and handle the objects for themselves as well as to explore and locate more archaeological facts at the side, the Indian History and Culture Society arranged a three-day (10th Oct 1992 through 13th Oct 1992) all-India workshop and seminar on "Archaeology and History of Ayodhya" in the main hall of the Tulsi Smaarak Bhavan at Ayodhya. The conference was attended by as many as 40 delegates, coming from Madras (Prof K V Raman), Dhaarwaar (Prof A Sundara), Bangalore (Dr. S R Rao), Ahmedabad (Prof R N Mehta), Jaipur (Shri R C Agrawal), Saagar (Dr. S K Pandey), Naagpur (Prof Ajay Mitra Shastri), Varanasi (Dr. T P Verma), Faizabad (Prof K P Nautial), Patna (Prof B P Sinha), Bhopal (Dr. Sudha Malaiya), Delhi (Prof K S Lal and Davendra Swaroop), Allahabad [Allah'Aabaad] (Prof V D Mishra), Rewa (Prof R K Verma) and several others including Y D Sharma, K M Srivastava and S P Gupta, the excavators and explorers of Ayodhya. They not only came to the same conclusions as we had arrived earlier but added at least two more and most vital pieces of archaeological evidence – one, Epigraphical and second, architectural… The seminar proved to be a landmark in the history of Indian archaeology as never before had Indian archaeologists been called upon to examine for themselves archaeological evidence on a subject which was so very vital for the political future of the country and which had shaken other countries also including Pakistan, Bangladesh, the two immediate Islamic countries where even legally erected temples, including the new ones, were destroyed. pp. 116-117
Archaeologists have noted at least two temple destructions at Raam Janm Bhoomi – the first in the 13th century after which it was rebuilt, to be followed by second destruction in the 16th century; the first to be attributed to the successors of Ghurids, and the second to Baabar. Source: N S Rajaram, p 95
I wrote to Times of India furnishing evidence but they ignored so public should not know about it
Well, here is the Logo of Times Group, and it says “Let
the Truth Prevail”. Let us see whether they live by it or only love to show
So, the very next day I wrote to The Times of India in response to its report quoting some of these archaeological findings.
They however, chose to completely ignore it.
The question arises:
What role do the opinion-makers to the nation have?
What responsibility do they have?
Is it to present both sides of the story or, one side of the story that suits their specific agenda? There had been few more such instances, which I shall mention at appropriate places in my books. After this I decided to stop subscribing to The Times of India. Continuing subscription would have amounted to a conscious act of supporting and encouraging a deliberate public liar. It is for my readers to decide as to how they feel about it.
Why did former Professor of JNU lie to Public?
Why the former Professor of JNU made such an allegation against archaeologists? She would have known all this and plenty more that is given below, and yet she chose to avoid mention any of these?
Was she trying to make the public wiser or was she trying
to willfully misguide them?
Was she playing the role of an honest academician whose objective would be to explore the truth or, did she have an agenda to promote a vested interest, and lying did not matter to her?
It tells us about the character of our academics and our leading media, the public opinion-makers. We might wonder what would happen to the character of the nation, which is led by such people. Again, at this point we may want to see how it compares with our Hindu society that stood so long for truth and justice [please see chapter 1 Arise Arjun].
These JNU & AMU Professors frequently opposed archaeological research at the site
In fact, BMAC [Baabri Masjid Action Committee] and secularist side has frequently opposed archaeological research at the site, while the Hindu side wanted more of it. Ayodhya: K Elst, p 182
These JNU & AMU Professors committed serious breaches of academic deontology
It is not unfair to conclude that some of the pro-BMAC authors have committed serious breaches of academic deontology [*academic duty and obligation]. For me personally, seeing this shameless overruling of historical evidence with a high-handed use of academic and media power, was the immediate reason to involve myself in this controversial question. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 186
It is the duty of the people that they recognize, resist and oppose
adharm' at every level,
or else they all will become a party to it
Is it not unfortunate for the nation that the leading
media is on the side of untruth?
Is it not unfortunate for the nation that its vocal academics are on the side of untruth?
Untruth is adharm'.
It is duty of people that they recognize, resist and oppose adharm' at every level, or else they all will become party to it.
Please pay attention to the dates of excavations, court hearings, and Baabri structure demolition
Please look at the dates!
All these evidences were available well in time.
All-India archaeologists' meet at Ayodhya was concluded (10-13 Oct 1992) and their conclusions were known.
Baabri structure was not yet demolished.
Our judiciary had ample time on hand to examine everything that was available.
But they cared not!
Is not the inactivity and apathy of judiciary that is
primarily responsible for demolition of the structure?
When these judges will have the guts to accept that, in effect, it is them who are truly responsible for demolition of the Baabri Structure, and it is them who should be punished for not doing their job for which they are paid?
Chapter 6 — The Final Verdict
Archaeological evidence of Hari-Vishnu inscription: 6th Dec 1992
S P Gupta: And then, in less than two months, came the doomsday – on 6th December 1992, the structure disputed for over four centuries was demolished by the furious mass of those very Hindus whom recent history had written off as the ''most docile race'' on the face of the earth. From the huge debris, the few ''KarSevaks'' or the volunteers of Vishw Hindu Parishad, who had learned from the publications and the news-items published in the national dailies from almost January 1991 about the historical importance of every bit of archeological remains at the Raam Janm Bhoomi site, picked up in the evening and the night of 6th December at random those stone pieces, around 250 and odd, which had some carving over them and then dumped them in between the two rows of semi-pucca houses, built by VHP for their offices some 200 meters away, towards the south from the Janm Bhoomi mound; the VHP called it ''Raam Katha Kunj''. The Ayodhya Reference: p 117
3 dozens of them were of 10th and 12th century
S P Gupta: Not all were ancient; since scores of them, generally rectangular marble tiles, bore the dedicatory inscriptions in Dev'Naagari script of the 20th century. However, at least three dozens of them were certainly ancient, belonging to the period bracketed between 10th and 12th century AD. Two of these are fragmentary and datable palaeographically to a period fifty years later than the third inscription. The Ayodhya Reference: p 117-118
The most clinching evidence
S P Gupta: The third inscription is, however, the most important one for historians, archeologists, epigraphists, saints, politicians, activist and even the masses of this country and beyond since it provides the most clinching evidence in favor of the Reference that the President of India had made to the Supreme Court. This inscription, running in as many 20 lines, is found engraved on a 5 feet long, 2 feet broad and 2.5 inches thick slab of buff sandstone, apparently a very heavy tablet which must have required the hands and shoulders of at least four KarSevaks to get it shifted from the Raam Janm Bhoomi. One can imagine their peril. By the time they reached the dumping ground they seem to have completely lost their balance. They practically threw it on the ground and against one of the several stones already brought and dumped there. In the process, the stone tablet got broken obliquely on the left proper – a few letters at the point of breakage are, therefore, found missing; a couple of them were found by us fallen on the ground. Three-fourths of the first line is found obliterated anciently. The last line is also not complete since it was anciently subjected to chipping off. A portion of the central part is found battered; maybe someone tried to deface it anciently. The patination is, however, uniform all over the surface, even in those areas where once there were inscriptions. The Ayodhya Reference: pp. 118-119
Contents of the inscription
Prof Ajay Mitra Shastri: The inscription is composed in high-flown Sanskrit verse, except for a very small portion in prose, and is engraved in the chaste and classical Naagari script of the eleventh-twelfth century AD… It was evidently put up on the wall of the temple, the construction of which is recorded in the text inscribed on it. Line 15 of this of this inscription, for example, clearly tells us that a beautiful temple of Vishnu-Hari, built with heaps of stone and beautified with a golden spire unparalleled by any other temple built by earlier kings was constructed. This wonderful temple was built in the temple-city of Ayodhya situated in SaaketMandal (line 17) showing that Ayodhya and Saaket were closely connected, Saaket being the district of which Ayodhya was a part. Line 19 describes god Vishnu as destroying king Bali (apparently the Vaaman manifestation) and the ten-headed personage (DashAanan, i.e., Raawan). Line 20 contains an allusion to serious threat from the West, apparently posed by Sultan Subuktigin and his son Mahmoud of Ghazni, and its destruction by the king. The inscription certainly proves the building of a magnificent temple of Hari-Vishnu, the killer of Raawan, i.e., Raam. Source: The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgment and Commentaries, p 119 quoting Prof Ajay Mitra Shastri, Chairman of the Epigraphical Society of India, published in Puratattva, the official journal of the Indian Archaeological Society, No. 23 (1992-1993)
In response to Profs R S Sharma and Athar Ali
S P Gupta: During the talks held between two groups of historians, representing the All India Baabri Masjid Action Committee and the other Vishw Hindu Parishad, Profs RS Sharma and Athar Ali of the former group once asked the members of the latter group if they had any contemporary written document to prove that there was a Raam Temple at the site of Raam Janm Bhoomi prior to the coming up of the Baabri Masjid built by Mir Baqi in 1528 AD since without that they were not fully convinced that there was indeed a Hindu temple at the site, let alone the Raam Temple. Well, my dear learned professors, what have you to say now, except for the usual Marxist alibi that it may have been forged and then planted here? - If so, we will stand by our old offer: the Reward of Rupees Two Lakhs to anyone in the world who can forge it on a similar piece of stone and have the experts in the world take it as genuine as the present one has been accepted. History cannot be falsified the way it is being attempted by Sharmas and Athar Alis. Ayodhya Ref pp. 119-120
Why secularist historians did not get archaeological evidences examined by international experts instead of telling public that they were fraud?
The same counts for the inscription found during the demolition, which clearly mentions that the site was considered Raam's birthplace. At that time, many academics declared without any examination that the inscription, presented by scholars of no lesser stature than themselves, was a forgery. Thus, according to ''a group of historians and scholars'' including Kapil Kumar, B D Chattopadyaya, K M Shrimali, Suvira Jaiswal and S C Sharma, the ''so-called discoveries of artifacts'' during and after demolition were ''a planned fabrication and a fraud perpetrated to further fundamentalist designs''. If the secularists had really believed this, they would have requested access to the findings, which would readily have been granted by the Minister in charge, the militant secularist Arjun Singh. They would have invited international scholars as witnesses, and curtly demonstrated its falseness for all to see. Instead, just like B B Lal's report, this inscription became a skeleton in their closet, which they have to keep from public view as long as possible. Ayodhya: The Case against the Temple, Koenraad Elst, pp. 181-182
They are here to cheat the people
Look at the last set of argument presented by Koenraad Elst. These likes of Prof Shereen Ratnagar and plenty more whose stories will follow hereafter - these characters, if they wanted to find the truth all they needed was to examine the evidence. Instead, they kept shouting ‘no evidence’ or ‘fake evidence’. They did not care to invite international experts to have the evidence tested if they themselves were so incompetent to test the available evidence. These Communist (Marxist) historians are here basically to cheat the people leading them to false notions. But most English educated class believes these cheats because the media in control is with them. And this English educated class generally governs the bureaucracy and the judiciary of the nation. These elites have been educated and brought up with anti-Hindu sentiments through the Christianized-Macaulayite education system.
Politicized scholarship a curse to the nation
Politicized scholarship like this can only be a curse to the nation and soon our people get rid of these characters, the professional liars, better it is for them.
Chapter 7 — What more do we need?
What does Babur-Nama say?
Mrs. A S Beveridge writes in Babur-Nama: The contemporary Taarikh-i-Baabri describes how Baabar's troops demolished many Hindu temples at Chanderi when they occupied it. Some tough Zihaad rhetoric has been preserved from Baabar's war against the Raajputs, such as the quatrain: For Islam's sake, I wandered in the wild, prepared for war with unbelievers and Hindus, resolved myself to meet a martyr's death, Thanks be to Allah! A Ghazi I became. Source: Ayodhya: The Case against the Temple, Koenraad Elst, p 168
What 19th century historian Mirza Jaan says?
Until very recently, Muslim chroniclers made no efforts to conceal their record of temple destructions; far from it, they took pride in it. Here is just one example from the 19th century, written by Mirza Jaan, the author of a historical work known as Hadiqah-i-Shuhada that appeared in 1856: Wherever they found magnificent temples of the Hindus… the Muslim rulers in India built mosques, monasteries, and inns, appointed mu'azzins, teachers and store-stewards, spread Islam vigorously, and vanquished the Kaafirs. Likewise they cleared up Faizabad and Avadh [Ayodhya], too from the filth of reprobation (*infidelity), because it was a great centre of worship and capital of Raam's father. Where there stood a great temple (of Raam Janm'Sthaan), there they built a big mosque… what a lofty mosque was built there by king Baabar! A Hindu View of the World, N S Rajaram, pp. 96-97
What granddaughter of Aurangzeb wrote?
Some of the old sources used by Mirza Jaan have yet to be unearthed, but one, which he quotes from, a Persian work known as Sahifah-i-Chihal Nasa'ih BahaadurShaahi written in 1707 by a granddaughter of the Mogul emperor Aurangzeb is particularly interesting. The Mogul princess declares: Keeping the triumph of Islam in view, devout Muslim rulers should keep all idolaters in subjection to Islam, brook no laxity in realization of Jizya [*religious tax on Hindus], grant no exception to Hindu Rajas from dancing attendance on Id days and waiting on foot outside mosques till end of prayer… and keep in constant use for Friday and congregational prayer the mosques built up after demolishing the temples of the idolatrous Hindus situated at Mathura, Banaaras and Avadh [*Ayodhya]. Source: A Hindu View of the World, N S Rajaram, pp. 96-97
What British administrator H E Neville recorded in District Gazetteer?
In 1528 AD Baabar came to Ayodhya (Audh) and halted a week. He destroyed the ancient temple (marking the birthplace of Raam) and on its site built a mosque still known as Baabar's mosque. It has two inscriptions, one on the outside, one on the pulpit; both are in Persian; and bear the date 935 A. H. Ayodhya: M V Kamath, p 4
What so many Muslim and European scholars have to say?
According to an unpublished research paper written by Girish Munshi "there is ample evidence in writings and records of Muslim scholars to prove the essential fact of temple destruction. Named are Mirza Jaan, Muhammad Asghar, Mirza Rajaab Ali Beg Surur, Sheikh Mohammed Azmet Ali kakorwi Nami, Haji Muhammad Hussain, Maulvi Abdul Karim, Allama Muhammad Najamu Ghani and Munshi Maulvi Hashmi. Also named are many Europeans including William Finch, Joseph Tiefenthaler, Montogomery Martin, Edward Thornton and Hans Bakker." Ayodhya: M V Kamath, p 4
What Encyclopaedia Britannica said?
On Ayodhya, there has always in living memory been a consensus: among local Muslims and Hindus, among European travellers and British administrators. As late as in 1989, the Encyclopaedia Britannica (entry Ayodhya) reports without a trace of hesitation that the Baabri Masjid was built in forcible replacement of a temple marking Raam's birthplace. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 154
Flouting the academic custom
When there is such a consensus on a given issue, the academic custom is not to reopen the debate until someone comes with serious evidence that the consensus opinion is wrong and that a different scenario is indicated by newfound (or newly interpreted) facts. But the only evidence to surface during the debate was presented by the VHP-mandated team and merely reconfirmed the old consensus. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 154
What British Judges said?
British judges have explicitly not subscribed to the thesis, now defended by the BMAC and the BMMCC, that there had never been a Hindu temple on the contentious spot. On the contrary, in his verdict in 1886 a British judge observed: "It is unfortunate that a mosque should have been built on land held especially sacred by the Hindus, but as that happened 356 years ago, it is now too late to remedy the grievance''. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 161
The above comment was made by the District Judge of Faizabad in his judgment on 16th March 1886 after personally visiting the land in dispute on 15th March 1886 in the presence of all the parties. He paid that visit in response to the appeal of Mahant Raghubans Das (Appeal No. 27 of 1886). Ayodhya: M V Kamath, p 4
Today’s English educated judges do not seem to have that courage
The beauty is that a British judge had the conviction to admit the truth that the mosque had been built over the temple but today’s English educated judges do not seem to display that courage by examining the archaeological evidences presented to them! What has happened to our Macaulayite elite? They have stooped down so low that one would wonder if they are fit to occupy the coveted positions of judiciary. British judges did not want to take a decision on the matter and following their footprints our Indian Englishmen judges too want to keep the subject in dustbin for over 50 years.
A crime against the society as a whole
It would be quite all right for our present day judges to declare that they are incapable of delivering justice to Hindu society, but to hold it for over 50 years and play with it as per their whims and fancies is a crime against the society as a whole.
To whom are these judges answerable?
It is a crime against a billion Hindus all over the world. Who will try these judges for the crime they commit against the humanity?
All the British sources, such as Edward Balfour in 1858 and archeological Survey of India's field explorer A Fuhrer in 1891, confirm the tradition that the Baabri Masjid had replaced a Raam temple. A wealth of documents from the 17th century onwards, by European travellers and by local Muslims, confirms unanimously that the Baabri Masjid was considered to have been built in forcible replacement of a Raam temple. These witnesses also describe firsthand how the place was revered by the Hindus as Raam's birth site, and that Hindus always came back to worship as closely as possible to the original temple site: they would not reasonably have done this except in continuation of a tradition dating back to before the Baabri Masjid. The VHP (Vishw Hindu Parishad) evidence bundle also contained a large number of quotes from ancient literature to prove that the Raam cult is not a recent development, and that the status of Ayodhya as a sacred city has been uninterrupted since at least 2000 years. The same counts for the inscription found during the demolition, which clearly mentions that the site was considered Raam's birthplace. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 161, p 155, p 157
What do the Court documents prove?
What these court documents prove is: Firstly, that the Hindus kept on claiming the site in principle, even if for the time being they were willing to settle for a license to worship on a platform just outside the contentious building. Secondly, that the Muslim pleas always focused, not on questioning the temple destruction tradition, but on the accomplished fact that they had owned the place for centuries, long enough to create an ownership title no matter how and from whom they had acquired it. And Thirdly, that the British rulers did not want any raking-up of old quarrels, and therefore upheld the status-quo, but without questioning the common belief that the Masjid had replaced a Hindu temple. K Elst, pp. 160-161
If someone loots your property today
Let us look at the Muslim plea that they had owned the place for centuries, long enough to create an ownership title no matter how and from whom they had acquired it.
This would mean if someone by wrong means snatches your property today, you will have no recourse to law to get it back simply because at one point of time you lost it. This is not how the world works today. We need to know what is happening around the world today.
What Courts in Australia, New Zealand and the Americas doing today in similar circumstances?
Today, judges and governments in Australia, New Zealand and the Americas are increasingly conceding the right of indigenous communities to restart worship at their sacred sites. Koenraad Elst, p 188
Where does the problem lie?
Koenraad Elst: The problem with Ayodhya, the cause of all this rioting and waste of lives and political energy, is not that Hindus want to adorn their own sacred site with proper temple architecture: that is the most normal thing in the world. Ayodhya: p 188
The problem is that another party, the Islamic-Christian-Marxist combine in India, is trying to obstruct this perfectly unobjectionable project of architectural renovation. Koenraad Elst, p 188
Islam is taking the position that
Against the near-universal consensus that all sacred sites are to be respected, Islam is taking the position that it has the right to occupy and desecrate the sacred sites of other religions. Koenraad Elst, p 188
Why press, politicians, historians tried to keep public misinformed and confused? Question arises:
Why prominent media, politicians, historians have chosen
to ignore highlighting any of these to public?
Do they not want public to be fully informed?
Do they not want public opinion to be swayed by truth?
Do they want public to remain ignorant and confused?
What is their responsibility and role towards the people of BhaaratVarsh?
Chapter 8 — A Web of Deceit
Clothed as Secularists, BMAC hired Marxist Historians of AMU and JNU, falsely declared themselves as independent historians; lied to public again and again; abusing their position of Trust, with an intent to mislead the people and to cheat them; they also attempted to conceal and destroy evidence.
At times we carry (in our mind) different shades of meaning for the same term and therefore, to be precise, we bring you the dictionary meaning of deceitful, which relates to a person or a group of persons, who deliberately deceive or mislead others, more particularly on a habitual basis.
Deceit the action or practice of deceiving or misleading someone by concealing or misrepresenting the truth.
Deceitful (of a person) deceiving or misleading others, typically on a habitual basis. Oxford Dictionary, p 476
Befitting our CommunistMarxist historians of AMU and JNU
You will be amazed to see how well this definition fits our leading CommunistMarxist historians, the professors who have made lying as their main profession, and they all seem to come from a particular place: either AMU (Aligarh Muslim University) or JNU (Jawaharlal Nehru University). Why they all come from a particular place, there is a complex history behind it, and we will go into that later, in another book.
How to fabricate history and how to lie boldly and authoritatively
The interesting part is that until these so-called reputed professors appeared on the scene, the Muslims were not lying that there existed no temple. All they were saying that they were in possession of the land long enough to entitle them the title to the land. This is what the court documents revealed (please see the last chapter). However, once these professors arrived on the scene they simply started producing a new version of the history that there never existed a temple. How to fabricate history and how to lie boldly and authoritatively, one must learn from them.
Character of our trusted historiansEnough of archaeological evidences we have seen. Now let us have a close look at the character of our trusted historians, academics in whom we posed our faith. Let us see how they used or abused their position of trust.
Their fat salaries and perks were paid from predominantly Hindu taxes
And let us remember that these cheats had been paid their fat salaries and perks out of the taxes that people of BhaaratVarsh paid from their hard earned money. If we also look at the statistics we will discover that most of these taxes came from Hindu populace. And it is this Hindu population that these professors specialized in cheating.
Moral and ethical cheating amounting to conspiracy
Here we are not talking financial cheating of which ample documentary evidence you will find in Arun Shourie’s Eminent Historians: Their Technology, Their Line, Their Fraud. Here we talk of their moral and ethical cheating that they committed repeatedly and in a manner that can well be termed as a conspiracy.
ChandrShekhar Government’s efforts
In December 1990 and January 1991, at the request of the ChandrShekhar Government, the BMAC (Baabri Masjid Action Committee) and the VHP (Vishw Hindu Parishad) exchanged historical evidence for their respective cases. Koenraad Elst, p 149
Prof Harsh Narain, Prof B P Sinha, Dr. S P Gupta, Dr. B R Grover and Mr. A K Chatterjee represented VHP. None of them formally associated with VHP except Gupta. Koenraad Elst, p 10
Prof Irfan Habib & Prof R S Sharma
BMAC approached Prof Irfan Habib of ICSR (Indian Council of Historical Research) who in turn collected a team of genuine historians for them, led by Prof R S Sharma to represent them.
These historians projected themselves as independent historians and BMAC also endorsed it. Ref: Koenraad Elst, p 10
Why would they project themselves as independent historians and why would BMAC endorse it? Public would naturally give them greater credence if they were to project themselves as independent historians. Independent, in this context, would mean they had no personal interest in the matter and they were being impartial. This is what they wanted people to believe.
Truth was opposite
But the truth was otherwise. They were paid employees who could not afford to be impartial. They had a responsibility to protect the interests of their employer. If they failed to look after their employer’s interests they would be fired. In this manner they did have a substantial personal interest and they were dependent on it. There was no reason for them to have presented themselves as ‘independent historians’ when they were not so. Yet they chose to do it only to mislead people deliberately and in a calculated manner.
Their very foundation was based on lie
Using such tactic based on a lie speaks volumes about the deceitful character of these eminent historians. Their very foundation was based on lie. They were telling the public: that we are independent historians so please accept what we say as truth uninfluenced by any vested interest. But they did not tell the public: that we have been employed by BMAC and therefore we will only say what serves BMAC objectives. They also did not tell public: that we are the CommunistMarxist historians who are ideologically anti-Hindu and would do everything in our power to see that Hindu interests are subverted at every level possible.
Thapar, Sharma and Habib
We are not inventing that they are CommunistMarxist historians; for reference we can look up to Tom Bottomore’s History of Marxist Thought, Oxford 1988, entry 'Hinduism' where Thapar and Sharma have been quoted as representative of Indian Marxism. Besides this, Habib has subtitled his recent book Essays in Indian History (Tulika, Delhi 1995) as Towards a Marxist Perception. Refer: K Elst, p 19 fn
That goes down the memory lane
By falsely presenting themselves as ‘independent historians’ they created a false public perception that they were being impartial. This is how they fed the people with a lie, which went down the public memory.
Calculated game plan of Irfan Habib
Prof Irfan Habib was quite clever. He kept himself in the background for his name suggests him a Muslim. He put R S Sharma on the lead whose name suggests a Hindu Braahman. 
Look at how it influences public psychology
If Hindu Braahman-born Sharma says he is independent historian then public will believe him. More than that if the Hindu Braahman says there never had been a Raam temple at that location, if not all, many people will believe him. Those who are from his school (CommunistMarxists, FakeSecularist, Self-professed Secularists) will believe him and those who are taught in Christian Missionary schools and raised Indifferent-Hindu will also believe him. In this category, we can also count Macaulayite elites - our learned (in ChristianBritish ways) judges and bureaucrats. The conduct of our judges over past 50 years speaks volumes about this attitude. For, they deliberately ignored to look at all available evidences and kept delaying the process of justice. This is not a contempt of court. This is a statement of fact about the conduct of certain individuals who happen to have occupied the position of judges.
Justice must support the truth
In democracy, all individuals must be open to criticism (no class should have immunity from that) if their individual conducts, in their respective areas of responsibility, point towards a failure to do their job, as was expected of them, when facts of the case point towards that. We have seen enough evidence of this in earlier chapters of this book itself. Justice must support the truth, and when truth itself is against them, and then they should display the grace to humbly accept that. Otherwise, they are not fit to be the judges.
CommunistMarxists have no ethics
General public would never know R S Sharma is a CommunistMarxist [and his team too] and these CommunistMarxists have no religion though some of them may have once been born in a Hindu Braahman family, which was of course the misfortune of that family. As we will see hereafter, again and again, through their actions on different occasions that these Communists have no ethics.
Prof R S Sharma and 41 other CommunistMarxist Professors
But their lie did not end at such cheap technique as projecting themselves as independent when they were hired guns. They mastered it beyond that.
On January 24 (*1991) the parties met in order to discuss the evidence. But the BMAC team leader, Prof R S Sharma, well-known Marxist historian, said that he and his colleagues had NOT YET STUDIED the VHP material (to which the BMAC had agreed to reply by January 10) (*that was 2 weeks prior to scheduled meeting date January 24). This is most remarkable, because the week before, he had led 42 academics in signing a much-publicized statement, saying that there was DEFINITELY ABSOLUTELY NO PROOF WHATSOEVER AT ALL FOR THE PREEXISTING RAAM TEMPLE. He had issued more statements on the matter, and even published a small book on it (Prof R S Sharma, Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya, People's Publishing House, Delhi, 1990). Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 152
Look at the contradiction
What does it say? Prof Sharma had signed, and led others to do so; making categorical statement that there was ‘definitely absolutely no proof whatsoever’ and a week later he says he had not studied the facts. Without studying the facts that were already available with him for quite some time, how could he have arrived at the conclusion and made that much-publicized signed public statement that there was ‘definitely absolutely no proof whatsoever’? The proof was obviously in his hand for long enough, which he only needed to study. Or, maybe he had studied it and yet chose to lie, as usual because he was in no position to dispute the facts. He and his eminent colleagues could only lie with the help of media, which was only too accommodative all the while. After all, which was their real lie? That they had not studied the facts; or, that there was definitely absolutely no proof whatsoever at all for the pre-existing Raam Temple. The higher they rise lower they fall it seems; or is it that, lower they stoop higher they are positioned in anti-Hindu cultures.
That means he was lying to public willfully to misguide them. What about other historians? They too had no conscience? They also simply joined him and lied?
What is their profession: to convey the truth about the history, or to lie about the history? One wonders if, to some people, the profession of history and profession of lying have same meaning. The higher they rise lower they fall it seems!
Why did these 42 do so?
He had much-publicized that statement signed by him and others. So the public had believed him considering his eminence as a historian. Why did these 42 do so? The publicity did what they wanted it to do. They broadcasted the lie and it was believed and it left its desired impression on the public memory. The popular media, in any case, does not care to expose these lies.
Characters built upon Lie - Careers built upon Lie
This is abuse of position and trust that people place on them. This speaks lot more about their character. Characters built upon lie. Careers built upon lie.
Individually specialized in Lies in their respective fields of Expertise
As we will see through the forthcoming episodes (more details: Arise Arjun) that these eminences had individually specialized in lies in their respective fields of expertise, and based on these lies they had gained national and international recognition as eminent historians. The world has now come to know how the Communists of USSR operated. We are gradually learning how CommunistMarxist intellectuals in India have been operating. They all seem to specialize in lies of different kinds. Let us see some more examples.
Let us see what they did next
The next meeting was scheduled for the next day, January 25. But there, the BMAC scholars simply did not show up. They had not presented written evidence worth the name, they had not given a written refutation of the VHP scholars' arguments, they had wriggled out of a face-to-face discussion on the accumulated evidence, and finally they had just stayed away. Thus ended the first attempt by the Government of India to find an amicable solution on the basis of genuine historical facts. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 153
Summary of events
They represented it at the meetings Mr. Chandr Shekhar's Government had convened for settling the matter by evidence. That was an outstanding initiative of Mr. ChandrShekhar: for such contentious issue ought to be dissolved in the acid of evidence. These leftist "historians" had attended the initial meetings. They had put together for and on behalf of the Committee (BMAC) "documents". It had been a miscellaneous pile. And it had become immediately evident that this pile was no counter to the mass of archaeological, historical and literary evidence which the VHP had furnished, that in fact the "documents" these guides of the Baabri Committee had piled up further substantiated the VHP's case. These "historians" having undertaken to attend the meeting to consider the evidence presented by the two sides, just did not show up! (*January 1991). It was this withdrawal, which aborted the initiative that Government had taken of bringing the two sides together, of introducing evidence and discourse into the issue. Nothing but nothing paved the way for the demolition (*December 1992), as did this running away by these "historians". It was the last nail: no one could be persuaded thereafter that evidence or reason would be allowed anywhere near the issue. Eminent Historians: Their Technology, Their Line, Their Fraud, Arun Shourie, pp. 7-8
Prof Irfan Habib & Home Minister Subodh Kant Sahaay
When asked in public forums the results of the scholars‟ debate, both Prof Irfan Habib (historian at Aligarh Muslim University) and Subodh Kant Sahaay (who was the Home Minister at the time of the debate) have declared, “the VHP has run away from the debate”. Leading newspapers have refused to publish denials of allegations. Ayodhya: The Case against the Temple, Koenraad Elst, p 170
Liars are often not very creative
In fact, this unfounded allegation provides an interesting illustration of the psychology of lie. Liars are often not very creative, and they tend to say things that are partly inspired on the truth. Thus, Prof Habib and Mr. Sahaay are perfectly right in alleging that the debate has been ended because one of the parties has "run away from the debate": to the extent, their version is transparent of the truth. Only, it is not the VHP but the BMAC which has turned its back on the debate. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 170
Leading newspapers refused to publish the truth
So they lied outright. And leading newspapers refused to publish the truth. If this were the character of our professors, ministers and leading journalists, then what would happen to the nation?
The society has lived long in the wrong company
The society has lived long in the wrong company and is getting corrupted by bad blood. Lies everywhere!
They were capable of what was not expected of any academics of repute
Well, it would be undermining their character if we were to stop at this point after knowing that they were capable only of mass lying. No, they were capable of much more. They were capable of what was not expected of any academics of repute.
These Eminent Historians were caught Concealing and Destroying Evidence
Before concluding, we want to register a remark in a minor but quite significant chapter in the exchange of evidence: the VHP-mandate scholars have, in their argumentation, pointed out no less than four attempts where scholars belonging to the anti-temple party have tried to conceal or destroy documentary evidence. Those are of course cases where the attempt failed because it was noticed in time, but the question must be asked how many similar attempts have succeeded. At any rate, there has not been attempt from the anti-temple side to counter or even deny these four specific allegations. They have also not been able to point out any similar attempt by the pro-temple party to tamper with the record. Koenraad Elst, pp. 17-18
But the media promotes the Liars and the Cheats, and Public Opinion heavily DEPENDS on media exposure
Look at how low they can go. They call themselves historians of repute, and they indulge in cheating by concealing or destroying evidence! Amazing character they possess. What is their credibility? But the media promotes them, and public opinion depends on media exposure. The voice of truth is suffocated.
Role of foreign scholars
Foreign scholars might have played the role, which the Supreme Court judges rejected: that of independent arbitrators. But as it turned out, the established Western academics, to the extent that they cared to look into the Ayodhya debate at all, have only looked through the glasses which the India's Marxist-Muslim combine has put on their noses. It is not reassuring to watch the ease with which foreign scholars have absorbed or adopted the non-temple thesis from their Indian colleagues (whom they assume to be neutral observers) even without being shown any positive evidence. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, p 100, p 20
Academic Fraud & Politicized Scholarship
Future historians will include the no-temple argument of the 1990s as a remarkable case study in their surveys of academic fraud and politicized scholarship. With academic, institutional and media power, a new academic-journalistic consensus has been manufactured denying the well-established history of temple demolition by Islamic iconoclasm to the Baabri Masjid-Raam Janm Bhoomi site, at least among people with prestige and influence but no firsthand knowledge of the issue. But the facts will remain the facts, and their ongoing suppression is bound to give way as new generations of scholars take a fresh look at the idea. Ayodhya: Koenraad Elst, pp. 21-22
In the name of Secularism, they have indulged in large-scale falsification of history to advance their political agendas and careers
What the Ayodhya debate has done is raise historical awareness among the Hindus. So it is only a matter of time before the record of falsification of history by Secularist historians is exposed. Their careers and reputations are at stake. Thanks to years of patronage by political and dynastic interests, these men and women have enjoyed recognition, positions and privileges out of all proportions to their true worth. Even worse, in the name of Secularism, they have indulged in large-scale falsification of history to advance their political agendas (and careers). N S Rajaram, pp. 91-92
Built a career on a foundation of lies
That is what is really at stake here: careers and reputations of these men and women not only as scholars, but even as ordinary human beings. It is hard enough to admit that one has been wrong, but to admit that one has built a career on a foundation of lies is to live in infamy. A Hindu View of the World, N S Rajaram, p 92
This is the character of our media, on whose reporting we trust!
The clear-cut result of the Ayodhya evidence debate is still not widely known. Most of the Indian English-language papers, as well as the official electronic media, have all along been on the side of the BMAC, and they have strictly kept the lid on this information. Their reporting on the scholars' debate has been very partial and, from the moment the BMAC's defeat became clear, increasingly vague. Ayodhya: Case against the Temple, Koenraad Elst, p 187
This is the character of our media, on whose reporting we trust!
How did they all manage to sell their souls?
One cannot help but wonder if all this has been a money
How much smuggled hawaala Arab money has changed hands?
Who all had been bought over?
How did they all manage to sell their souls?
And everything else that humanity could boast of
They all seem to have sold their sense of ethics, justice, and everything else that humanity could boast of. It included all those well-known respected (?) CommunistMarxist professors wearing secularist masks, all those respected (?) self-proclaimed secularist editors of major media outfits, the minister in-charge, etc.
We dare not add Judges in this list
However, we cannot dare add judges in this list because they will be very pleased to accuse me for contempt of court, and quickly follow it up with a short-term jail sentence to give me a lesson. In this manner, the justice will be real quick, no more 50-100-year delay. Therefore, we must say that justice has been just beyond doubt, in this case (Ayodhya)! They are the only one, to whose respect we dare not put a question mark!
It is a crime of its own kind
These people seem to specialize in lying.
What kind of new generation they are cultivating?
We must not have liars in significant academic arenas.
It is a crime of its own kind.
Over confident criminals only make stupid mistakes
Now we see this so-called professor invent a new story about missing Ayodhya inscription from museum. Amazing thing is that in his innovation he is so foolish. When he wanted to lie at least he ought to have found out that the lie does not fall flat on a stupid mistake. But then over confident criminals only make stupid mistakes. This so-called professor Irfan Habib [with his loyal colleagues who are no less liars] made a noise that the stone inscription was removed from the museum and planted at disputed site of Ayodhya but the fool did not take the trouble to visit the museum for precaution to find out how the museum catalogues its inscriptions. He must have seen in some other museum use of Roman alphabets for cataloguing purpose and he simply copied the idea not knowing that Lukhnow museum does not use this system for its cataloguing!
What was not expected 'of' him, he has done
I need not seek pardon for use of adjectives like liar, criminal or fool for a person whose character is so dubious and who has thoroughly abused his position of high academics. What was not expected ‘of’ him, he has done; so, what is not expected ‘for’ him, he has got.
It is a shame that liars are called professors or professors take up
the profession of lying
Prof Irfan Habib invents yet another stupid lie
Jitendra Kumar, Museum Director: An unnecessary hue and cry has been made by a section of historians including Prof Irfan Habib about the missing of a stone inscription of 1184 AD from the Lukhnow State Museum. Jitendra Kumar while speaking to Mid-Day said that the one and only Ayodhya inscription is safe and intact. Kumar denied reports that the inscription was missing from the museum and that the same had been planted at the disputed site by vested interest during the demolition of Baabri Masjid on 6 December 1992. Kumar clarified that he was not aware of any other Ayodhya-related bearing inscription XLIV as has been alleged by some left historians. Any inscription bearing such a number was never sent to the museum, he clarified. He rubbished the charge of some historians that the inscription XLIV is missing. There is no question of having any inscription with the number XLIV as the catalogue of the museum had a numeric system and there was no possibility of any inscription or other articles with alphabetical listings. The inscription in possession of the museum is numbered Arch Dept. 53.4. It measures two feet four inches by 10 and half inches, is vertical in shape and broken from one side … The Museum Director clarified that the inscription which is in possession of the museum is made of sand stone and there was no other copper plate inscription as has been alleged. Source: The Free Press Journal, 9 May 2003, p 3
Why after 11 years?
Irfan Habib made this noise using media in year 2003 claiming that the inscription was planted in December 1992. That was after 11 years. Why did these liars choose such a time? Was it because once again archaeological excavations were going on under Allahabad [Allah’Aabaad] High Court’s order and from whatever has so far been found it appeared that the temple indeed existed before Baabar came to loot and destroy our heritage? Like every time they get the feel that their lies are on the verge of getting exposed they invent new lies and create new commotion to divert public attention from the truth. And the popular media, the cheat, is always on their side.
Why these eminent historians do such petty things, outright cheating?
One might wonder as to why these eminent historians do such petty things, outright cheating? As N S Rajaram puts it in perspective:
What the Ayodhya debate has done is raise historical awareness among the Hindus. So it is only a matter of time before the record of falsification of history by Secularist historians is exposed. Their careers and reputations are at stake. Thanks to years of patronage by political and dynastic interests, these men and women have enjoyed recognition, positions and privileges out of all proportions to their true worth. Even worse, in the name of Secularism, they have indulged in large-scale falsification of history to advance their political agendas (and careers). That is what is really at stake here: careers and reputations of these men and women not only as scholars, but even as ordinary human beings. It is hard enough to admit that one has been wrong, but to admit that one has built a career on a foundation of lies is to live in infamy. A Hindu View of the World, N S Rajaram, pp. 91-92
They all seem to be making a last ditch effort to somehow salvage their conspiracies being slapped back at their faces.
They understand the value of media and its ability to influence the thought process of masses
One of the things in their favor is that they understand the value of media and its ability to influence the thought process of masses. They make good use of it by launching the offensive first.
Offended side has not yet fully appreciated power of media
The offended side, however, has not yet fully appreciated the power of media. It has realized its enormous impact but they have not learned how to use it to their advantage.
Meticulously cultivated and harvested the new crops over past 50 years
Most of the prominent English media is under the clutches of same ideological group, which has carefully and meticulously cultivated and harvested the new crops over past 50 years of Nehru dynasty. This new crop committed to their ideology still reins the most, practically all, prominent media in English and their vernacular counterparts.
That would be geared to show them in poor light
Therefore the offended side does not get adequate coverage, and when it does get coverage it is generally to highlight such issues and in such perspective that would be geared to show them in poor light.
Taking it on a war-footing
Now these offended people, looking at their own helplessness, keep fuming and frustrating themselves instead of taking it on a war-footing and developing necessary organizational strength.
Divided they make not much of impact
Mostly all they do is to remain divided and put their individual efforts, which collectively could have generated enormous impact but divided they make not much of impact.
First impression becomes a lasting impression
What do these so-called respectable historians gain
from cheating public with their lies?
They are aware that majority people read the news when it is first presented in a sensational manner and that first impression becomes a lasting impression.
Then offended people will look around, find the facts and clarify but by now that news item has subsided and it is no more a matter of public interest because by now some other news item would have occupied public attention.
Criminal not of the type that is defined in criminal law
Knowing this common phenomenon these so-called learned
people thoroughly abuse the system.
These are learned with criminal vent; criminal not of the type that is defined in criminal law because they do not have the guts enough to indulge in those, so they indulge in social crimes, misleading public abusing their position of trust.
The Times of India Logo
The logo says LET TRUTH PREVAIL
But it truly means LET UNTRUTH CLOUD THE TRUTH WITH ITS CLOUT
Will the bosses at Times of India, someday, confess publicly the lies it supported and the harm it inflicted to public interest only to satiate their greed?
Prof. Shereen Ratnagar as on 19 March 2009, that is, 6+ years after her public lie - will she confess publicly her numerous lies on Raam Mandir issue when she is on her death bed?
Chapter 9 — Let the Present Generation Face the Truth
Why all other evidence has been kept aside?
- Why is it that always Baabri Masjid demolition has to be in the forefront when the issue of Raam Temple at Ayodhya is to be discussed?
- Why all other relevant matters must be ignored?
- Why matters like Baabri structure was in use as Hindu temple since 1949, which was pulled down to replace it with proper Hindu architecture, should not even be discussed?
- Why matters like Baabri structure was never used as a mosque since 1936, and that no Namaaz were ever performed since then, must be suppressed all along?
- Why matters like tons of evidence that there was a Raam Temple that was pulled down centuries ago to construct Baabri Mosque in its place should be avoided mention of?
- Why the fact that the mosque itself was called by Muslims in their records as Janm'Sthaan Masjid signifying it to be a mosque built on Janm'Sthaan [birthplace] of Shri Raam should not be told to people who do not live in Ayodhya to know that?
- Why the historians who tried to destroy evidence should not be highlighted in the press?
- Why media should not expose the dubious character of these historians who have demonstrated this compulsive obsession to lie at all fronts possible about Raam Temple issues?
Why Baabar built Baabri Mosque?
- Did Baabar build Baabri Mosque in 1528 with the sole objective of finding a place for Muslims to worship?
- If that was the case why did he have to destroy Raam Temple and use its material to build Baabri Mosque in its place?
- Was it not a mark of victory over Hindus?
- Was it not meant to be a continuing reminder of the defeat and humiliation to the people of BhaaratVarsh?
- If not, why would then Baabar write in his memoirs:
For Islam's sake, I wandered in the wild, prepared for war with unbelievers and Hindus, resolved myself to meet a martyr's death, Thanks be to Allah! A Ghazi I became. Source: Babur-Nama translated by Mrs. Beveridge, quoted by Koenraad Elst, p 168 fn
Must the truth be suppressed all along to avoid temporary disturbances?
- The moot question is that whether we should keep quiet about it or, we should educate people about it?
- More and more people become aware of the truth, more and more they would want justice restored. This will, no doubt, bring certain amount of disturbance.
- Must the truth be suppressed all along to avoid temporary disturbances?
What happens when we face the truth?
- For some time we are in distress but then it is not permanent.
- Soon we get over the bitterness caused by it and start accepting the truth as it is.
- That is when we start respecting the truth.
- Once this process sets in all disturbances gradually settle down and stable peace emerges.
Passing the buck to future generations
- Avoiding admitting the truth only postpones the problem only to be revisited later with deeper amount of discontentment leading to greater degree of upheavals.
- This amounts to passing the buck to future generations.
- This only reflects at the cowardice of the present generation to face the truth as it is.
When it comes from academics, its reach is wider and deeper
- Conspiracies involving suppression of truth and clothing untruth as truth can only compound the problem.
- When it comes from academics, its reach is wider and deeper compounding the injustice manifold.
- Conspiracies are resorted to not by the braves but by the cowards of first order.
They corrupt everything that is valuable to human ethics beyond repair
- They corrupt the system, the society, and the sense of justice and everything that is valuable to human ethics beyond repair.
The true enemies of any society
- These are the true enemies of any society; they are the hidden enemies, most difficult to combat.
Europe does not deny barbaric acts of Hitler & Mussolini
- What Hitler and Mussolini did in Europe was not forgotten, nor it was suppressed, nor was the opposite clothed as truth.
- They had the courage to face the truth straight into all its ugliness.
- That is why finally they were able to get rid of it.
Germany that has risen from the ashes of Hitler
- Germany that has risen from the ashes of Hitler and Italy that has risen from the ashes of Mussolini are essentially better places to live than what they could have been if European academics and Nazis combined together in a conspiracy to suppress the truth and clothe untruth as truth.
- But here Communist academics, Macaulayite elite and Indian Muslims together are conspiring to suppress the truth and clothe untruth as truth.
What Popes had done in the name of Inquisition was not forgotten by Italy
- What Popes had done in the name of Inquisition was not forgotten by Italy and now it has discarded them as a disease, so much so that Christianity is no more state religion for Italy, nor many Italians go to churches as they did earlier.
- Popes are now busy earning money from drug trade [see Popes Saints Cardinals Archbishops Bishops] and expanding their business of Christianity into Asia in a big way [see Christianity in a different light] to make up their losses in Europe, which is practically throwing them out.
Why India wants to deny barbaric acts of Muslim rulers?
- No point hiding behind curtains and keep misguiding the Indian people the Hindus and the Muslims.
- Tell them the whole truth and let them decide for themselves.
Let the newer generation display the courage to face the truth
- Do not give them the crap any more.
- People are more capable of accepting the truth as it is than these politically motivated Fake-Secular scholars and Islamic clergy.
- Let the newer generation display the courage to face the truth.
Let Present Generation Indian Muslims know their true roots
- Indian Muslims need to realize that most of them were Hindus originally.
- Their forefathers were inhabitants of BhaaratVarsh and were Hindus.
Let Present Generation Indian Muslims know what Islam did to their forefathers
- Their forefathers were converted to Islam at the point of sword, at the cost of inhumane tortures, at the cost of capturing and enslaving Hindu women and children who were their ancestors.
- It is high time that present generation Muslims may learn to hate those beasts rather than hero-worship them.
Let Present Generation Indian Muslims ask themselves a few questions
They need to ask themselves a few questions:
- Why do they not realize that no Namaaz had been offered at that location since 1936 and that structure had been in use as a Hindu temple since 1949 with the consent of all concerned?
- Why they do not return to Hindus what is rightfully theirs?
- Why the present generation Muslims do not recognize this bitter truth and try to undo this by NOT objecting to Hindus building Raam Temple there?
The problem is not what Muslims did in the past, but what they do today
The problem is not what Muslims did in the past, but what they do today: Hindus are trying to exercise a right which religious communities everywhere obviously have, viz. to worship at their own sacred site; and Muslims are trying to deny them this self-evident right - not in the middle ages, but today. Ayodhya: The Case against the Temple, Koenraad Elst, pp. 99-100
Sense and sensibility dictate that
The leaders of the Muslim community are in no mood to yield an inch, even though in their heart of hearts they know that the construction of a Raam temple at the disputed site was only a matter of time. No government can put back the disputed structure at the disputed site any more. No government can demolish the makeshift temple built at the disputed site, which is regularly visited by Raam'Bhakts [Raam-devotees]. Since for the Muslim the disputed site had become important only because the proponents of the Raam temple had laid claim to it as the birthplace of their god, it will be immensely wise if they made a graceful gesture and voluntarily relinquished their claim on the said site. That will earn them the goodwill of the majority community. Living in peaceful coexistence with the majority Hindus ought to be higher concern than clinging to a decrepit and disputed building, which was a mosque only in name though it had never seen "Namaaz" being performed there in more than half a century. Sense and sensibility dictate that the Muslims make the big gesture. Otherwise, what they do not concede voluntarily, they might find, has been taken away from them through other means. Editorial, The Free Press Journal, 11 June 2003, p 4
They must unite and oppose these leaders of their own
- It is important that Indian Muslims understand what Ayodhya issue is truly all about.
- They need to realize that it is high time that they come forward and oppose their own leaders who have been unjustly politicizing the issue.
- They need to realize that BMAC politicians and FakeSecularist politicized scholars are using them as their pawns.
- These politically guided people are loyal to none except to their own immediate agenda.
- Common Muslims must realize that injustice of this kind prolonged for too long can only hurt them.
- Indian Muslims need to realize that it is the time they must unite and oppose these leaders of their own who are essentially working against their true interests.
Politicians have no Ethics
It is truly unfortunate that many Fake-Hindu leaders have also been responsible for supporting the untruth and denying the truth. They have their vested interest. In a kind of parliamentary system that India has, politicians find it in their interest to woo Muslim votes by denying the truth and by perpetrating untruth.
adharm' has seeped in our system so deeply that
- The values that Hindu society once enjoyed in 'The Past' are lost in its antiquity.
- adharm' has seeped in our system so deeply that it has eroded national values and corrupted the nation.
Or else, it will drown the entire society
- Today, more than any other time, it has become necessary to recognize, resist and eliminate adharm' or else, it will drown the entire society.
Recognize these JaiChand-types and MeerZaaffer-types
Hindu leaders have endorsed the Muslim propagandists in proclaiming that Islam does not permit the construction of mosque at other people's places of worship. One wonder whether this kowtowing to Islam is prompted by ignorance, or cowardice, or calculation, or a combination of them all. The Islam of which Hindu leaders are talking exists neither in the Qur'an nor in the Sunna of the Prophet. Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Temples what happened to them Vol. II, cover-3
Every sincere Hindu must recognize these JaiChand-types and MeerZaaffer-types [traitors] in our society and avoid voting for such opportunist politicians.
Prof Manjari Katju compares Shri Raam with Hitler and Mussolini
I was looking at the book review of the title ‘Vishw Hindu Parishad and Indian Politics’ written by Manjari Katju and published by Orient Longman. The reviewer mentions that the writer puts Raam on par with Mussolini and Hitler [The Free Press Journal Spectrum March 30, 2003 page 6 column 3]. What a wonderful comparison!
Shri Raam gave up his birth right to the throne of Ayodhya in favor of his stepbrother Bharat at the insistence of his stepmother Kaikeyi, to fulfill his father Dashrath’s old-time promise to grant her three wishes when she had saved his life in a critical battle prior to marriage. This Shri Raam also accepted 14 years of exile into the woods, without any royal benefits and to live like a commoner (rather, with much less privileges than a commoner would normally enjoy, because commoners do not have the compulsion to live in a jungle, away from rest of the civilization), again at the insistence of his stepmother, lest the people of Ayodhya revolt and make Raam the king. Bharat, of course, was not around when all this transpired. This Shri Raam returned the kingdom of Shri Lanka to the rightful owner Vibhishan after defeating Raawan without retaining it for himself, which most conquerors do. But this character by name Manjari Katju found Shri Raam and Mussolini, Hitler alike!
How they shape the World Opinion?
This is the quality of our self-proclaimed secular scholars who manage to get their books published by well-known publishers like Orient Longman so that it receives wider publicity and readership. This is how they shape world opinion.
Granddaughter of VHP ex-President
This Manjari Katju tells that her study started as a doctoral thesis and her grandfather Shiv Nath Katju was a long member of VHP and later its President as well, in the late eighties. She claims to have received all possible help from VHP activists who freely granted her interviews which were conducted first towards the end of 1993 and after between September 1995 and May 1996 and this period relates well to the time of upheaval with regard to Raam Temple Baabri Masjid conflict. [Book Review, The Free Press Journal Spectrum 30 March 2003, page 6]
When we bring-up our children with Christian missionary education and/or Marxist association
Interestingly, this is what happens when we bring up our children without adequate understanding of our culture and heritage, blinded by the glamour of Christian missionary education and the promise of greater materialistic prosperity with the help of English education. That is where they receive their grounding during formative years only to be accentuated by youth-time Marxist thinking, which brands 'God a historical concept' and denies anything worthwhile in Hindu system of living.
Status November 2003
ASI once again unearths archaeological evidence of there being an earlier Temple below ground of Baabri structure but Muslims go back on their promise and refuse to admit the truth once again and thus, the show goes on
Under the instructions from Allahabad High Court, Archaeological Survey of India undertook excavations at the disputed sites at Ayodhya. Once again it was proved that there was a temple at that place.
The 574-page ASI report, opened in the court on Monday, has said, "Evidence of existence of an ancient temple of north Indian art had been found at the disputed site". Source: The Free Press Journal, Mumbai, Tuesday 26 August 2003, front page
However, Sunni central WAQF board (SCWB) disputes that. Thus, the show goes on!
Status June 2005
Our Christian missionary educated brown sahib Englishmen Judges of present times
I remember it clearly that in those days of year 2003 every few weeks there would be a news item which would indicate that Allahabad High Court was getting very impatient with the excavations and they wanted it finished within abnormally short period of time as if they thought archaeological excavations are acts of magic that need to be performed within a few weeks and delivering justice is an act of extraordinary labor for which past 60 years had been insufficient.
From their conduct it would appear as if Allahabad High Court judges thought that if sufficient time is not given for excavations no evidence would turn out in favor of a temple existing prior to the Baabar’s loot and genocide and our Christian Missionary educated judges would be too glad to pronounce a judgment in favor of the untruth because every time the truth stared on their face they ran away, such has been their upbringing as humans and unfortunately, as judges. But to their misfortune truth could not be suppressed howsoever these pillars of justice wanted it buried. ASI found the truth and reported it, finally.
Since that was presented to Allahabad High Court in August 2003 almost two years have passed and those judges have again gone to sleep [Kumbh'Karn Nidra]. I do not see any more in news papers judges getting impatient about their own inactivity. Whenever they seem to face the truth they seem to run away like the proverbial rats in a sinking ship. Here the sinking ship is the judiciary which has consistently shown its inability to deliver justice to the people of the nation and its inability to uphold truth. The proverbial rats desert the sinking ship; here, the judges desert their responsibility towards delivering justice! And as far the media is concerned, which boasts itself to be the fourth estate of democracy (or whatever) is always ready to sell their souls for a few bucks.
Status July 2005
Muslim terrorists attack makeshift Raam temple at Ayodhya
Terrorists struck on Tuesday 5 July 2005 9:20 AM. They failed.
Stricter security arrangements have been made. Muslims organizations are opposing that. It would help their terrorist brothers.
The game continues with inactivity of judges produced
by Christian English Education System. Media keeps merrily propagating Muslim
interests. Politicians keep public attention diverted.
People do not know who is avoiding due responsibility out of fear, who is sold to petrodollars, and who is safeguarding vested interests.
Perhaps everyone is taking for granted the legendary Hindu tolerance. That tolerance may give way to a volcanic eruption but it is not capable of sustained violence.
Hindus find themselves orphaned for want of worthy leadership with vision, courage and integrity. We will probe into the various causes that have prevented rise of worthy leadership, in our later works.
Supplement — Status 2010
13 November 2010 15:21 +0530
Allahabad High Court finally admitted the validity of the claims by Hindu side.
Now, the efforts are on to get it nullified through Supreme Court.
SC meant Supreme Court. In the context of Ayodhya Case, a new name has gained popularity: SC to stand for (pseudo) Secular Court. Track record of SC aptly justifies this new name.
Order of information given below • ISBN [Edition] • Author • Title
- ISBN 0-14-024051-9  Taslima Nasrin, Lajja
- ISBN 0-14-100437-1  F Max Muller, INDIA what can it teach us?
- ISBN 019-565432-3  The New Oxford Dictionary of English
- ISBN 81-208-0045-1  Vaman Shivram Apte, The Student’s Sanskrit English Dictionary
- ISBN 81-7028-086-9  Hardev Baahri, RaajPaal Hindi ShabdKosh
- ISBN 81-85990-03-4  Sita Ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What happened to them Vol. II The Islamic Evidence
- ISBN 81-85990-30-1  The Ayodhya Reference: Supreme Court Judgment and Commentaries (1) Arun Shourie, Introduction (2) The Supreme Court Judgment (3) Chief Justice M Rama Jois (Retd.), On the Decision Not to Decide (4) S P Gupta, If Only the Court had Examined the Evidence
- ISBN 81-85990-52-2  N S Rajaram, A Hindu View of the World - Essays in the intellectual Kshatriya Tradition
- ISBN 81-85990-58-1  edited by Sita Ram Goel, The Calcutta Qur'an Petition
- ISBN 81-85990-75-1  Koenraad Elst, Ayodhya: The Case against the Temple
- ISBN 81-900199-8-8  Arun Shourie, Eminent Historians: Their Technology, Their Line, Their Fraud
- Collins English Gem Dictionary, London and Glasgow, Britain, 1969
- M V Kamath, Ayodhya: an unhappy refusal by Muslims, an article published in The Free Press Journal, Mumbai, Editorial page, 17 July 2003
- Manjari Katju, Vishva Hindu Parishad and Indian Politics, Orient Longman [Book Review by M V Kamath in The Free Press Journal, Mumbai edition, 30 March 2003, Spectrum p 6]
- Vishal Sharma, Babar’s aberration haunts a millennium; an article published in The Free Press Journal, Mumbai, July 17, 2003, Op-Ed page
Index can be found in the physical copy of the book.