`  == Comments on the block== * It is a complaint and I have the rightly described the nature of edits being done by these two editors.Blocking me gives a wrong signal to them and probably will encourage such concerted POV pushing. * I have already mentioned somewhere that the organisations supported by these editors have been mentioned as having fascist tendencies by world media.They cant deny that. * Some examples against whites from User: Bose. ``There is no shortage of hindu-haters among white scholars, or their pinko moonbat lackeys in India. Surely some hindu-hater like Wendy Doniger, Deepa Mehta or Arundhati Roy has a copy of the film on their website. Find it. Then put it up.``  * ``The world outside the US is irrelevant`` : Read the para ``Human Rights Watch has been criticized as a fraud`` in .See how the edits end.``The world outside the US is less relevant``  : My mention of them as US government lawyer and (not Wikipedia's) was their attitude in the article.No comment below is racist in character.This is a false charge and the user who has made that should be blocked.Secondly, they insist on pushing some comments from Daniel Pipes (who is widely known for his Pro-Jewish POV leanings)  The complete thread of that discussion is mentioned below  : Refrain from inserting original research that is irrelevant to the Babri Mosque article. Plus, the section on Pipes you inserted is tantamount to a character assassination of well-respected and US government appointed political scholar Daniel Pipes. Further perpetration of such a deed is grounds for reporting.Netaji   Reporting as legal??TerryJ-Ho  Is Wikipedia a US government property and you their lawyer? I have taken cue from you .In fact, I have been everyone as Anti-Hindu.TerryJ-Ho   : In this comment I have not named anyone as Hindu Taliban such inference is just an imagination.I have only given a general example.   `