The media should also be held responsibile

Flaring up communal feelings? NDTV did not show 18 temples demolished under courts Order. The double standards of our third rate Indian Media.Please Fwd to all conscious citizens of this nation. Visual media did not show 18 temples demolition NDTV and allied channels are repeatedly showing the old shots of Vadodra violence. Why it did they not SHOW THE DEMOLITION OF TEMPLES? IN MADURAI SEVERAL TEMPLES WERE DESTROYED (see the photographs above). DID THE MEDIA SHOW IT TO THE WORLD? NO. One Darga is being repeatedly shown. See the type of irresponsible media we have. NDTV should be held responsible for such irresponsible action. Muslims never honour any courts decision and come to streets. When so many temples were demolished, no violence took place but for a single Darga there is so much of violence. NDTV is spraying fuel on fire as elections are going on in various States, so the Communist agenda is to be implemented. The "secular" English media kept silent when Temples were demolished in Tamil Nadu


An estimated 40 Hindu temples, some as old as forty years, were demolished in Tamil Nadu in Feb. 2005. This demolition spree continued for more than three days. The bulldozers, (remniscent of Israeli bull dozers) went about in razing to ground all the temples. One of these temples was 50 years old. The "secular" English media however kept silent. The news was reported by the Madurai edition of the local Dinamlar in the front page. For some of the snaps of this gruesome incident, check out

http://dinamalar.com/2005feb17/imp1.asp


Nothing happened when the temples were brought down, but disturbance started when the dargah was demolished. Why?
Ref: Disturbance in Baroda against the demolition drive undertaken by the Baroda Municipal Corporation. The drive resulted in tearing down of 4 temples and a dargah so that the roads could be widened. While nothing happened when the temples were brought down, disturbance started when the dargah was demolished. Why?
There were orders to demolish any kind of encroachment, temple or a mosque or any illegal construction
http://in.rediff.com/news/2006/may/01guj1.htm

While giving chronology of the events, Swaroop said, "The demolition drive has been on for the last 15 days, as per the master plan of the city. There were orders to demolish any kind of encroachment, whether it's a temple or a mosque or any illegal construction in the house of a senior officer." He added, "As per the order, some temples, too, have been demolished. Swaroop said, "I used to pray at a Sai Baba temple right across from my house. Even that was demolished a few days back and I could do nothing about it. Today it was the turn of the dargah of Rashidudin Rahimtullah, a Sufi saint."

I agree with you but not totally...anything that is an encroachment should be demolished..that is my personal opinion.Just take Chennai for instance...in every nook and corner you will find a small temple..initially it will start as a small idol kept on the pavement..people will start doing pujas etc...then ,slowly they will build a mandap for it...then a small temple..then a big one.Autorickshaw drivers will have one for each of their auto stands and this is a very common sight.Why is this allowed in the first place?

Because nobody has the courage to question it...if they do question it,it becomes a communal riot!In many places,you will not find a pavement for the pedestrians to walk because it will be occupied by the so called temples.Once a temple is established,the site where it stands becomes like the temple's property...even if the government wants to reclaim this land to construct the erstwhile pavement,it is not possible.You can see this very clearly in almost all the roads in Chennai.

I am not against temples alone,even if it is a mosque or church,if it is an encroachment,it should be demolished.

Originally Posted by sunitha

I agree with you but not totally...anything that is an encroachment should be demolished..that is my personal opinion.Just take Chennai for instance...in every nook and corner you will find a small temple..initially it will start as a small idol kept on the pavement..people will start doing pujas etc...then ,slowly they will build a mandap for it...then a small temple..then a big one.Autorickshaw drivers will have one for each of their auto stands and this is a very common sight.Why is this allowed in the first place?

Because nobody has the courage to question it...if they do question it,it becomes a communal riot!In many places,you will not find a pavement for the pedestrians to walk because it will be occupied by the so called temples.Once a temple is established,the site where it stands becomes like the temple's property...even if the government wants to reclaim this land to construct the erstwhile pavement,it is not possible.You can see this very clearly in almost all the roads in Chennai.

I am not against temples alone,even if it is a mosque or church,if it is an encroachment,it should be demolished.

dear sunitha,
u have misunderstood ...what i mentioned was when the hindus dont make a hue abt these thing abiding and so the media is not bothered but taking a mosque and the entire crowd goes emotional .....so the media also splashes the same all over...the government is at fault either way..u cant make a mosque or temple overnight...any encroachment has to be done away with...what abt slums u will see one hut then another if u dont notice then it all builds up into an empire...the politician happily look away and then some -------- come s by want to buy the land turn it into industry and all being razed....so the vigilance and exposure is not equally spread...only communal flames being lit everywhere.....regards sunkan