"The fuss over Liberhan Report has mostly died down, at least in the media, but it has brought the Ayodhya issue back to "our consciousness". ....many young readers seem mystified by the fuss and annoyed by the refusal of journos to tell them what it is all about?" Thus mused Vir Singhvi in Ayaodhya for dummies (Hindustan Times Dec. 6, 2009) So he set about answering twelve most frequently asked questions on the Ayodhya issue.

Did he really tell "what it is all about?"

To analyze his answers to all the twelve questions and his answers is well beyond the scope of this short response. Let us address a few points raised by him.

To the question "Did Muslims destroy Hindu temples?" Mr. Singhvi responded:

"The sad answer is yes, they did. Some of this was for the purpose of looting (temples were rich) but some of the destruction was religion-driven."

Then in response to "Wasn't this terrible?" he says:

"Yes, it was. There is no getting around that. Religious tolerance was not always a quality prized by medieval Muslim warriors."

It is actually surprising that Mr. Singhvi, even hesitatingly as an after-thought, accepts that "some of the destruction was religion-driven" and "Religious tolerance was not always a quality prized by medieval Muslim warriors."  It must have pained him much and so he has to balance it with.