pramanik @ppmanik@qoto.org

Sports and leisure in the year 2000, illustrated by Jean-Marc Côté. https://humanoidhistory.tumblr.com/post/188952327914

#babasaheb #AYODHYAVERDICT

Who has the copyright of Manto's stories. Suppose I make a #film based on his story, do I need permissions? #query #films #filmaking

Still wondering how we got tagged with the Tukde Tukde term while sanghis literally broke everything into Tukde which they didn't like. Karsevaks are real Tukde Tukde gang not us. #India #AYODHYAVERDICT

@navneetmathur Hi, I'm new to the Mastodon platform. A boost would be much appreciated. Thank you!

Indian Muslims should organise and at least register a protest in democratic way against the injustice meted out to them. If you keep tolerating this majoritarianism India will be doomed

As a Hindu I feel threatened by this paradigm of Criminal appeasement because people of the Hindu faith in India will now be captives of a regressive and empowered group of religious fanatics who will use the taste of victory to exercise their will on progressive Hindus without fear of law.

@14maverick04 "This judgment is based on faith, not facts. The apex court used Article 142, which gives it special powers. We did not demand land for land. But you gave us five acres of land in exchange for 67 acres,” Farooqui told IANS. (All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) Executive Member)
(Copy pasted from news site)
SC stated that Hindus worshipped at Ayodhya before British came. While ASI agreed that the mosque was not built on a vacant land. ASI also refrained from recording a finding on whether mosque was built after demolishing a Hindu temple.If we solely believe in facts and not clouded by emotions and faith, we need to ask ourselves. Is this evidence enough?
If you read the verdict, SC didn't decide primarily on/ care about  ASI findings. They had other 'valid' reason like 'evidence of Hindu worshipping took place at Outer courtyard ' etc etc. Let's just assume that Ram Mandir actually took there and Mughal Emperor Babri demolished it in 1500s. Does India (a democratic entity formed in 1947) have jurisdiction over him?
Or can we apprehend Ravan from SriLanka because he kidnapped Sita?
When Indian constitution came into force from 1950, it promised us a secular democratic nation where we adhere to its rules and regulations. That's the reason why all princely states agreed to join India.
If Babri masjid demolition didn't take place and Court actually did find 'undeniable ' evidence. We are more than happy to agree to it.
But they demolish it by force (1992) and facing no major repercussions for their actions is disheartening.
So anyone can attack minorities in the future based on ASI findings which allegedly prove some hypothetical existence? Can we stand and let it happen? What message does it send? 
#AyodhyaVerdict

SC’s judgment is notable because:

it highlights that any dispute can be amicably solved in the spirit of due process of law IF U OWN THE LAW

it reaffirms the independence of our judiciary TO UPHOLD MAJORITARIAN VIEWS, transparency and farsightedness.

it clearly illustrates everybody is equal before the law BUT SOME ARE MORE EQUALER.