I appreciate the exercise in cognitive contortion. The author of the post makes the following observations:<p>- Babar's memoir is very honest about himself and his desires<p>- Babar's memoir is unlikely to have been written for circulation<p>- Babar's memoir states he wants to eradicate Hinduism and destroy its temples<p>Ghosh's conclusion? Babar didn't _really mean it_, he only wrote that down to appease the Indian Muslims he was trying to court, and in reality Babar was a great defender of Hinduism. Proof? He wasn't as virulent an iconoclast as he could have been.<p>I would certainly never believe such people existed, with so fervent a devotion for the people that hate them, were it not for their diligence in writing down their own thoughts. And if ever there is to be more meaning derived from the toppling of the Babri Masjid, beyond religious zealotry, then it should be a long overdue civilizational immune response to this category of intellectual.