DMK's and AP Target - Hindu Temples

[Husky]

2/2



Just excerpting the bit that caught my eye. Rest of the article (and its context) at link.



Oh, and the answer to the question "Who did it?"

=> Christianism.





vijayvaani.com/FrmPublicDisplayArticle.aspx?id=2450

Judicial Activism to Judicial Overreach to Judicial Encroachment: Birth of a Monster

Radha Rajan

07 Sep 2012

[...]



Readers are urged not to lose sight of the following facts:



- The central government’s SLP was filed only as an appeal against the Gujarat High Court Order dated 2 May 2006; to emphasise, the UPA government’s SLP in the SC when it was filed on 4 May 2006 concerned itself only with Gujarat and the Gujarat High Court Order



- In February 2005, a division bench in the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court comprising [color="#0000FF"]two Christian judges, Justices Ashok Kumar and Dinakaran[/color] [color="#800080"](Oh look! Cryptochristians)[/color], over-stepping their brief and transgressing the scope of a small case that was before them, ordered the Madurai corporation and all local municipal authorities and panchayats to demolish and remove all encroachments. Considering what we know about these two judges today, it may not be far-fetched to suppose that the judges knew exactly what they were doing and why. Moving swiftly to fulfil the orders of the Madurai Bench, Jayalalithaa’s men went on the rampage bulldozing everything in their path - homes, shops and Hindu temples. Over 250 temples were demolished in Madurai, Tiruchy and Kanyakumari, including temples that had stood for twenty, thirty and even fifty years. Some of the temples and other revered structures threatened with demolition were over a hundred years old! [color="#0000FF"]The samadhi of Muthuswami Dikshitar of revered memory and one of the three Mummurtis or saints of Carnatic Music, the hoary Bhoothalingaswamy temple believed to have been consecrated by Maharishi Patanjali and the dearly loved, famous Madurai landmark Ganesha-under-the-peepul-tree were three such ‘illegal encroachments on public land’ facing Jayalalithaa’s guillotine.[/color]

In this asuric orgy of destruction, only one church and one dargah were demolished.

[color="#0000FF"]www.vigilonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1428&Itemid=71[/color]



Hearing on the UPA government’s SLP in the Supreme Court dragged on for two years with no decisive movement forward with regard to the appeal against the High Court Order asking for 1200 temples and 260 Islamic shrines to be removed in Ahmedabad. But in a bizarre turn of events, probably encouraged by the docility with which Hindus in Tamil Nadu accepted the order of Justices Ashokan and Dinakaran and certainly encouraged by the impotence of Tamil Nadu’s Hindus who stood by and watched Jayalalithaa’s government destroy their temples, Sonia Gandhi decided to aim high.



Sonia Gandhi’s UPA, surviving on the jizya being paid in varied forms, decided to offer jizya from the debris of Hindu temples from across the country. In an inexplicable leap even for judicial overreach, on 25-03-2008 the Supreme Court delivered the Order expanding the scope of Sonia Gandhi’s SLP. From Gujarat, the theatre of war against Hindu street temples had expanded to include all States and Union Territories.



“This Court, while issuing notice on the Special Leave Petition on 4th May 2006, had stayed the operation of the impugned order.

Learned ASG states that the Central Government after convening a meeting of all the concerned Secretaries of the respective States would try to take a consensual decision to deal with the problems such as in the present case all over the country and seeks time for this purpose.

Put up after summer vacation”.



It was within the powers of the Supreme Court to reject expanding the original scope of the SLP, to have confined the same to Gujarat and delivered a speedy judgment on the central government’s petition appealing against the Gujarat High Court Order of 2 May 2006.



[color="#0000FF"]Instead, in what is seen by ordinary Hindus as unwarranted activism, the Supreme Court went along with the UPA government and broadened the canvas to now include religious structures (the real target being Hindu temples) throughout the country.[/color]



23 September 2009 – “I had taken a meeting with the Chief Secretaries of the States on 17-09-2009 with a view to evolve a consensus on the problem of encroachment of public spaces by religious structures. I am glad to report that after the meeting the following consensus emerged:

(1) No unauthorized construction of any religious institution namely temple, church, mosque, or gurudwara etc shall be permitted on public street/public space.

(2) In respect of unauthorized constructions of any religious nature which has taken place in the past, the State Governments would review the same on a case by case basis and take appropriate steps. This will be done as expeditiously as possible.



In the light of the above, the matter may be brought before the notice of the Supreme Court for appropriate action. If any affidavit is to be filed a draft affidavit based on the above consensus may be filed in the Supreme Court. I understand the case is coming up for hearing on 29th September, 2009”.

(Signed Gopal K Pillai, Home Secretary, Government of India, to Gopal Subramaniam, Solicitor General of India)



29-09-2009 – After reiterating that no new temple, church, mosque or gurudwara should be allowed to be built on “public streets, public parks or other public places etc, the Supreme Court concluded its Order on the 29th September 2009 with, “In order to ensure compliance of our directions, we direct all the District Collectors and Magistrates / Deputy Commissioners in charge of the Districts to ensure that there is total compliance of the order passed by us. They are directed to submit a report within four weeks to the concerned Chief Secretaries or the Administrators of the Union Territories who in turn will send a report to this Court within eight weeks from today.

List this matter for further directions on 7th December 2009”.

(Justices Dalveer Bhandari and Mukundakam Sharma of the Supreme Court)



[...]

But but but... didn't Elst recently promise that Sonia Gandhi was harmless/unimportant/etc? And at most can perhaps be "pressured" by churches to facilitiate... stuff. (I.e. that she can at most be a passive actor for christianism, instead of the active one she is and this despite the pope's call to arms - on Indian soil - to convert Asia in the 3rd millennium. "Onward christian soldiers".)

It's all innocent onlee.



Anyway, Codes of Theodosius and Justinian.