Nadeem F Paracha June 23, 2008
#9 Posted by akcheema on June 24, 2008 5:11:03 am
Re: # 8; majumdar
he was being paid good money to act the part; he'd have praised the G-spot for the right price! let alone the G-man/J-man
Regards
he was being paid good money to act the part; he'd have praised the G-spot for the right price! let alone the G-man/J-man
Regards
#8 Posted by majumdar on June 24, 2008 5:08:53 am
Oops, sorry..... actually Naseer didn't trash the G-man but praised the J-man. But getting an Indian to praise the J-man is a big achievement anyway.
Regards
Regards
#7 Posted by akcheema on June 24, 2008 4:54:50 am
Re: # 6; majumdar,
[[a character played by an Indian actor trashed the G-man.]]
You mean Nasir-ud-din Shah? when??
[[a character played by an Indian actor trashed the G-man.]]
You mean Nasir-ud-din Shah? when??
#6 Posted by majumdar on June 24, 2008 4:52:52 am
Dash babu,
I have not watched the movie. But one thing that would have appealed to Yasser mian (and me) would no doubt be that in the movie a character played by an Indian actor trashed the G-man.
Regards
I have not watched the movie. But one thing that would have appealed to Yasser mian (and me) would no doubt be that in the movie a character played by an Indian actor trashed the G-man.
Regards
#5 Posted by Dash_Dot on June 24, 2008 4:47:34 am
NFP - very interesting review. I have not seen it as yet - though I have the DVD with me. Now I will see it. Thanks.
BTW this review and your view is in slight variance to Mantolives gloving review of the same film.
BTW this review and your view is in slight variance to Mantolives gloving review of the same film.
#4 Posted by akcheema on June 24, 2008 4:42:58 am
Re: # 3; Taurean
I am not sure if masadi sahib can be lumped together in the same league as brother Zeemax; although Zeemax is perhaps far more radical on-line than what he may be in real life too!......pure speculation (almost wishful thinking!)
I am not sure if masadi sahib can be lumped together in the same league as brother Zeemax; although Zeemax is perhaps far more radical on-line than what he may be in real life too!......pure speculation (almost wishful thinking!)
#3 Posted by TaureanKhan on June 24, 2008 4:08:07 am
Dear NFP
you wrote:
"it's time we start addressing irrationally-charged matters like religious fanaticism as a psychological issue rather than an intellectual or an ideological one"
That is the crux of the discourse on religion, borne out by my own personal experience. I have personally observed that loss of identity (or an identity crisis), sense of insecurity and/or an emotional problem leads to religosity. Now I am not speaking for or against any religious system.. I think all are 'true' as 'constructed realities' of the adherents - because they 'believe' in those systems.
Look at the so called 'Taleban' and their supporters (mostly young, as per anecdotal evidence) in NWFP. There is a strong sense of deprivation, unemployment, tremendous global change dominated by Western culture (symbolised through the global media and transmitted through the dish antenas!!), there is the impotence of teh traditional tribal social structure to create social betterment AND of course there is the spineless government institutions. on top of all that, the rise of the alternative power structures because of the situation in Afghanistan...
Try to understand the symbolism of bombing CD shops, girls schools, providing vigilante justice, even suicide bombing etc... clearly a reaction because of a sense of insecurity. It is a strong sense of fear..albeit subconcious...An anology: when we see an insect 'perceived' to be very harmful, killing it is our knee jerk reaction...
Fearful of the West, steeped in traditional religious ideals, they are searching for an alternative paradigm, a sense of identity... call for 'sharia' is the only thing they know....they dont know Locke, Hume, Jeferson or Martin Luther et al!!! or even Jinnah for that matter...
Thanks
T Khan
p.s. masadi/zeemax/okhla etc... ok now I am ready for your attack!!
you wrote:
"it's time we start addressing irrationally-charged matters like religious fanaticism as a psychological issue rather than an intellectual or an ideological one"
That is the crux of the discourse on religion, borne out by my own personal experience. I have personally observed that loss of identity (or an identity crisis), sense of insecurity and/or an emotional problem leads to religosity. Now I am not speaking for or against any religious system.. I think all are 'true' as 'constructed realities' of the adherents - because they 'believe' in those systems.
Look at the so called 'Taleban' and their supporters (mostly young, as per anecdotal evidence) in NWFP. There is a strong sense of deprivation, unemployment, tremendous global change dominated by Western culture (symbolised through the global media and transmitted through the dish antenas!!), there is the impotence of teh traditional tribal social structure to create social betterment AND of course there is the spineless government institutions. on top of all that, the rise of the alternative power structures because of the situation in Afghanistan...
Try to understand the symbolism of bombing CD shops, girls schools, providing vigilante justice, even suicide bombing etc... clearly a reaction because of a sense of insecurity. It is a strong sense of fear..albeit subconcious...An anology: when we see an insect 'perceived' to be very harmful, killing it is our knee jerk reaction...
Fearful of the West, steeped in traditional religious ideals, they are searching for an alternative paradigm, a sense of identity... call for 'sharia' is the only thing they know....they dont know Locke, Hume, Jeferson or Martin Luther et al!!! or even Jinnah for that matter...
Thanks
T Khan
p.s. masadi/zeemax/okhla etc... ok now I am ready for your attack!!
#2 Posted by akcheema on June 24, 2008 1:50:45 am
Unless the root cause of this fanaticism (religious theology) is taken by the horns, nothing can change...it is all whitewash; underneath it all remains the same, until a few years later it surfaces again, somewhere else.
This sort of "moderate" picture has been brandished around ad nauseum by religious apologetics and their pathetic peers who lack the balls to call a spade a spade and hide behind the facade of political correctness.
KKL was one such pathetic excuse; surely by now we have heard them all, haven't we?
This sort of "moderate" picture has been brandished around ad nauseum by religious apologetics and their pathetic peers who lack the balls to call a spade a spade and hide behind the facade of political correctness.
KKL was one such pathetic excuse; surely by now we have heard them all, haven't we?
#1 Posted by aanandk on June 24, 2008 1:32:45 am
I watched KKL a few months ago and was pleasantly surprised that it was a watchable movie. But unfortunately, the movie dishes out a lot of cliches. There are lots of characters and various viewpoints are represented, but the characters are all black and white - either all goody goody or all evil.
The CIA operatives are somewhat awkwardly used as the "balancing" act in the movie, lest the movie appear too critical of Pakistan alone.
The CIA operatives are somewhat awkwardly used as the "balancing" act in the movie, lest the movie appear too critical of Pakistan alone.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- tahmed32: jay thakery: you were... I Want Jinnah's Pakistan
- CreateAlpha: Oh and one other... Uneven Democracy : The
- Skeptical: I really do not... Morality of Lawyers' Movement
- tahmed32: So the lawyer's movement... Morality of Lawyers' Movement
- CreateAlpha: I think Romair has... Uneven Democracy : The
- muqaddam: A simplistic view of... Crowning of a Crony
- nemesis3: #38 Posted by Pardesi... Uneven Democracy : The
- bulleya: anil#: ...can you define... Uneven Democracy : The








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content