Taj Mahal belongs to Lord Shiva; rename it as Taj Mandir: BJP MP Vinay Katiyar

News Network
October 24, 2017

Ayodhya, Oct 24: The controversy over Taj Mahal refuses to die down any time soon, and now BJP leader Vinay Katiyar has asked the authorities to rename the iconic historic monument located in Agra as Taj Mandir.

The firebrand BJP MP on Tuesday said that nothing is wrong in it as the whole compound belongs to Lord Shiva.

It was a temple earlier, Katiyar added.

Katiyar made these remarks after some activists belonging to Hindu outfit Hindu Yuva Vahini were arrested for reciting 'Shiv Chalisa' inside the premises of the Taj Mahal on Monday.

The incident triggered tension and the activists were formally arrested by the local police. They were released only after they submitted a written apology.

The MP had last week claimed that the Mughal mausoleum was actually a Hindu temple.

Kaityar said that the Taj Mahal was known as 'Tejo Mahal' and had a shivling, which was later removed from the monument.

“It was Tejo Mahal, Lord Shiva’s temple, where Shahjahan buried his wife and turned it into a mausoleum,” Katiyar, who had been in the forefront of the Ram temple movement of Ayodhya, had claimed.

“It was constructed by Hindu kings, the rooms and carvings there prove that it was a Hindu monument… it has also been termed as one by historian PN Oak,” he claimed.

The firebrand BJP lawmaker said like a Shiva temple, water drips from the ceiling in the Taj Mahal, which is not a case in any mausoleum anywhere and is like that only on a Shivlinga.

“It was a famous monument and was grabbed by Shahjahan,” Katiyar said.

“It was our temple but was made a mausoleum as they had more power. But it is a grand monument and national heritage… people come to see it and so it should be kept safe and secure,” he said.

Last week, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath gave a clear snub to his BJP colleague and MLA Sangeet Som for stirring the Taj Mahal controversy, stating that "it does not matter who built it and for what reason; it was built by blood and sweat of Indian labourers".

Som had courted controversy on Sunday, stating that the iconic Taj Mahal was built by traitors and hence, cannot be included in the Indian history.

Taj Mahal was also recently omitted from the UP Government's Tourism Booklet. However, the Taj Mahal later found a place of pride in the 2018 calender brought out by the Uttar Pradesh government.

Comments

khasai Khane
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

Tajmahal is a diversion topic. Look for what they're actually trying to hide with this.

 

BTW, 

 

Tajmahal is a grave of Mumtaz, wife of Shajahan. Islamic ruling is to level the graves to the ground/one hand span, regardless of who the person is - a prophet, a sahaba, or any modern day jaahil. Now this Tajmahal is basically a grave, a dargah, and a dargah not of auliya allah!

We should take this suggestion of BJP/Sangh parivar seriously and appreciate it coz any such durga/dargah should be demolished, or would have been demolished if the Sahaba were ruling us.!

 

 

If you think this is only an attack on Muslim history, well this shouldn't have been a part of a true islamic empire in the first place. Secondly, we show our strength in knowledge, education, serving the people etc.. 

 

Thafseer
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

This is just their propaganda to divert people mind from Shah Company issue to Taj Mahal. This is their plan people can forget Shah Company scam, But We don’t.

Imran
 - 
Wednesday, 25 Oct 2017

who is Vinay katiyar ? he is  just  barking but nothing will happen.

Indian
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

There it comes!!!!

 

 

shameless Fellows

 

shareef
 - 
Tuesday, 24 Oct 2017

This belongs to his father.

Junc rotten egg of BJP circus.

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 24,2020

New Delhi, Feb 24: They hail from vastly different backgrounds — Donald Trump is the son of a property tycoon while Narendra Modi is a descendant of a poor tea-seller.

Yet the two teetotallers, loved by right-wing nationalists in their home countries, share striking similarities that have seen them forge a close personal bond, analysts say.

Ahead of the American leader's first official visit to India, which begins in Modi's home state of Gujarat on Monday, the world's biggest democracy has gone out of its way to showcase the chemistry between them.

In Gujarat's capital Ahmedabad, large billboards with the words "two dynamic personalities, one momentous occasion" and "two strong nations, one great friendship" have gone up across the city.

"There's a lot that Trump and Modi share in common, and not surprisingly these convergences have translated into a warm chemistry between the two," Michael Kugelman of the Washington-based Wilson Center said.

"Personality politics are a major part of international diplomacy today. The idea of closed-door dialogue between top leaders has often taken a backseat to very public and spectacle-laden summitry."

Since assuming the top political office in their respective countries — Modi in 2014 and Trump in 2017 — the two men have been regularly compared to each other.

Trump, 73, and Modi, 69, both command crowds of adoring flag-waving supporters at rallies. A virtual cult of personality has emerged around them, with their faces and names at the centre of their political parties' campaigns.

A focus of Trump's administration has been his crackdown on migrants, including a travel ban that affects several Muslim-majority nations, among others, while critics charge that Modi has sought to differentiate Muslims from other immigrants through a contentious citizenship law that has sparked protests.

Both promote their countries' nationalist and trade protectionist movements — Trump with his "America First" clarion call and Modi with his "Make in India" mantra.

And while they head the world's largest democracies, critics have described the pair as part of a global club of strongmen that includes Russia's Vladimir Putin and Brazil's Jair Bolsonaro.

"There are many qualities that Trump and Modi share — a love for political grandstanding and an unshakable conviction that they can achieve the best solutions or deals," former Indian diplomat Rakesh Sood said.

Modi and Trump have sought to use their friendship to forge closer bonds between the two nations, even as they grapple with ongoing tensions over trade and defence.

Despite sharing many similarities in style and substance, analysts say there are some notable differences between the pair.

Modi is an insider who rose through the ranks of the Bharatiya Janata Party after starting out as a cadre in Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

Trump is a businessman and a political outsider who has in some sense taken over the Republican Party.

"Modi is a more conventional leader than is Trump in that he hasn't sought to revolutionise the office he holds in the way that Trump has," said Kugelman, a longtime observer of South Asian politics.

He added that genuine personal connections between leaders of both countries have helped to grow the partnership.

"George Bush and Manmohan Singh, Barack Obama and Singh, Obama and Modi, now Modi and Trump — there has been a strong chemistry in all these pairings that has clearly helped the relationship move forward," he added.

Trump has also stood by the Indian leader during controversial decisions, including his revocation of autonomy for Kashmir and his order for jets to enter Pakistani territory following a suicide bombing.

Analysts said the leaders would use the visit to bolster their image with voters.

A mega "Namaste Trump" rally in Ahmedabad on Monday will be modelled after the "Howdy, Modi" Houston extravaganza last year when the Indian leader visited the US and the two leaders appeared before tens of thousands of Indian-Americans at a football stadium.

"The success of this visit... will have a positive impact on his (Trump's) re-election campaign and the people of Indian origin who are voters in the US — a majority of them are from Gujarat," former Indian diplomat Surendra Kumar said.

"On the Indian side, the fact that Prime Minister Modi... (shares) such warmth, bonhomie and informality with the most powerful man on Earth adds to his stature... as well as with hardcore supporters."

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Agencies
April 23,2020

New Delhi, Apr 23: The nationwide lockdown in India which started about a month ago has impacted nearly 40 million internal migrants, the World Bank has said.

The lockdown in India has impacted the livelihoods of a large proportion of the country's nearly 40 million internal migrants. Around 50,000 60,000 moved from urban centers to rural areas of origin in the span of a few days, the bank said in a report released on Wednesday.

According to the report -- 'COVID-19 Crisis Through a Migration Lens' -- the magnitude of internal migration is about two-and-a-half times that of international migration.

Lockdowns, loss of employment, and social distancing prompted a chaotic and painful process of mass return for internal migrants in India and many countries in Latin America, it said.

Thus, the COVID-19 containment measures might have contributed to spreading the epidemic, the report said.

Governments need to address the challenges facing internal migrants by including them in health services and cash transfer and other social programmes, and protecting them from discrimination, it said.

World Bank said that coronavirus crisis has affected both international and internal migration in the South Asia region.

As the early phases of the crisis unfolded, many international migrants, especially from the Gulf countries, returned to countries such as India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh until travel restrictions halted these flows.

Some migrants had to be evacuated by governments, such as those of China and Iran, it said.

Before the coronavirus crisis, migrant outflows from the region were robust, the report said.

The number of recorded, primarily low-skilled emigrants from India and Pakistan rose in 2019 relative to the prior year but is expected to decline in 2020 due to the pandemic and oil price declines impacting the Gulf countries.

In India, the number of low-skilled emigrants seeking mandatory clearance for emigration rose slightly by eight percent to 368,048 in 2019.

In Pakistan, the number of emigrants jumped 63 per cent to 6,25,203 in 2019, largely due to a doubling of emigration to Saudi Arabia, it said.

According to the bank, migration flows are likely to fall, but the stock of international migrants may not decrease immediately, since migrants cannot return to their countries due to travel bans and disruption to transportation services.

In 2019, there were around 272 million international migrants.

The rate of voluntary return migration is likely to fall, except in the case of a few cross-border migration corridors in the South (such as Venezuela-Colombia, Nepal-India, Zimbabwe South Africa, Myanmar-Thailand), it said.

Migrant workers tend to be vulnerable to the loss of employment and wages during an economic crisis in their host country, more so than native-born workers.

Lockdowns in labour camps and dormitories can also increase the risk of contagion among migrant workers.

Many migrants have been stranded due to the suspension of transport services. Some host countries have granted visa extensions and temporary amnesty to migrant workers, and some have suspended the involuntary return of migrants, it said.

Observing that government policy responses to the COVID-19 crisis have largely excluded migrants and their families back home, the World Bank said there is a strong case for including migrants in the near-term health strategies of all countries, given the externalities associated with the health status of an entire population in the face of a highly contagious pandemic.

The Bank said governments would do well to consider short, medium and long-term interventions to support stranded migrants, remittance infrastructure, loss of subsistence income for families back home, and access to health, housing, education, and jobs for migrant workers in host/transit countries and their families back home.

The pandemic has also highlighted the global shortage of health professionals and an urgent need for global cooperation and long-term investments in medical training, it said.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 14,2020

Kathmandu, Jul 14: After staking claim to Indian territories of Lipulekh-Kalapani in  a new controversial map,  Nepal Prime Minister KP Sharma Oli on Monday claimed that Ayodhya, the birthplace of Lord Rama, is in Nepal and Lord Rama was Nepali.

“Although real Ayodhya lies at Thori, city in the west of Birgunj, India has claimed that Lord Rama was born there. Due to these continuous claims, even we have believed that deity Sita got married to Prince Rama of India. However, in reality, Ayodhya is a village lying west of Birgunj,” Oli claimed at an event organised at Prime Minister's residence in Kathmandu.

The Prime Minister also blamed India of cultural encroachment by “creating a fake Ayodhya.”

“Balmiki Ashram is in Nepal and the holy place where King Dashrath had executed the rites to get the son is in Ridi. Dashrath’s son Ram was not an Indian and Ayodhya is also in Nepal,” he claimed.

In an attempt to save self from criticism, Oli questioned how Lord Rama could come to Janakpur to marry Sita when there were "no means" of communication. He further said that it to be impossible for Lord Rama to come to Janakpur from present Ayodhya that lies in India.

“Janakpur lies here and Ayodhya there and there is talk of marriage. There was neither telephone nor mobile then how could he know about Janakpur,” Oli said.

Comments

Ahmed Ali Kulai
 - 
Tuesday, 14 Jul 2020

New controversy

 
BJP got next election Muddah

Farhan
 - 
Tuesday, 14 Jul 2020

Ab Ram Mandir Kaha Banega???

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.