Farzana Versey June 21, 2004
#132 Posted by stuka on June 24, 2004 10:37:31 am
Urstruly:
``We must join forces with those voices who oppose this scourge on humanity. We must organize these forces, become majority, and help enact and enforce laws that curb this behavior. We must tell this to all, how this behavior attacks like a cancer on the basic unit of the society i.e. family and thru its malignancy destroys the institution. ``
This would be valid for India as well as US.
``We must join forces with those voices who oppose this scourge on humanity. We must organize these forces, become majority, and help enact and enforce laws that curb this behavior. We must tell this to all, how this behavior attacks like a cancer on the basic unit of the society i.e. family and thru its malignancy destroys the institution. ``
This would be valid for India as well as US.
#131 Posted by stuka on June 24, 2004 10:36:15 am
Urstruly:
Post 110 is 100% correct. I cannot disagree with you at all. Thank you for expressing what I feel but would never have managed to do so.
I don`t agree with the execution bit of the Sharia though understandably.
Post 110 is 100% correct. I cannot disagree with you at all. Thank you for expressing what I feel but would never have managed to do so.
I don`t agree with the execution bit of the Sharia though understandably.
#130 Posted by Urstruly on June 24, 2004 10:12:33 am
rsridhar
what goes around, comes around. Have a good life. bye bye
what goes around, comes around. Have a good life. bye bye
#129 Posted by nooralain on June 24, 2004 9:53:57 am
#127 & #128
We encourage all to participate in discussions. All we ask you to be is civil. If your post includes words or masked references that are offensive, crude, repugnant, or obscene, your post will be duly deleted. We thank you for your participation.
the ``moronic`` farzana bibi, the ``low-class`` farzana bibi as you keep referring to and have referred to again and again and again and again ad nauseam (or should one say ad ignoreum) first of all, has not in her post accused the baba. she has referred to the allegations made against the baba, and posed a question. where does she say that this is a fact? how does this translate into everything that you have said about her? does she herself violate chowk guidelines by posing a question that is already out there?
you and those of your ilk have never bothered to back up your arguments with anything but maligning farzana`s character, from making insinuations about anything that goes in her personal life. and i`ve observed this, as an outsider for quite sometime now. your devotion to the baba is admirable, it truly is. but if a baba would as part of his teaching encourage you to be as insulting as you have been to ms. versey for the duration that she`s been here, that raises a question or two or more.
you complain about your post being edited. shall i direct you to the ad nauseam posts that have not been edited that insult a `religious` figure and that figure`s countless followers? how about the posts that refer to certain human beings as pond scum, and worthless human beings? the ones directed against women, of which yours would be innumerable given your tendency to insult farzana versey. and your passion to insult `pakis`?
undoubtedly there would be some who miss you here. but the air in chowk would be just a little less stagnant.
thumbs up! and all the best!
We encourage all to participate in discussions. All we ask you to be is civil. If your post includes words or masked references that are offensive, crude, repugnant, or obscene, your post will be duly deleted. We thank you for your participation.
the ``moronic`` farzana bibi, the ``low-class`` farzana bibi as you keep referring to and have referred to again and again and again and again ad nauseam (or should one say ad ignoreum) first of all, has not in her post accused the baba. she has referred to the allegations made against the baba, and posed a question. where does she say that this is a fact? how does this translate into everything that you have said about her? does she herself violate chowk guidelines by posing a question that is already out there?
you and those of your ilk have never bothered to back up your arguments with anything but maligning farzana`s character, from making insinuations about anything that goes in her personal life. and i`ve observed this, as an outsider for quite sometime now. your devotion to the baba is admirable, it truly is. but if a baba would as part of his teaching encourage you to be as insulting as you have been to ms. versey for the duration that she`s been here, that raises a question or two or more.
you complain about your post being edited. shall i direct you to the ad nauseam posts that have not been edited that insult a `religious` figure and that figure`s countless followers? how about the posts that refer to certain human beings as pond scum, and worthless human beings? the ones directed against women, of which yours would be innumerable given your tendency to insult farzana versey. and your passion to insult `pakis`?
undoubtedly there would be some who miss you here. but the air in chowk would be just a little less stagnant.
thumbs up! and all the best!
#128 Posted by rsridhar on June 24, 2004 9:00:00 am
re: my last post
Since Chowk admin has thought it fit to edit out my last post completely, i feel compelled to stop interacting here unless Chowk staff can offer me an explanation.
My last post was a befitting reply to this woman`s insinuation of a person who is revered as a saint by more than 100 million people worldwide. These include people from different nationalites, cultures and professions. By insinuating a saint of wrongdoing, without any proof and just based on some press stories (we know what those stories are about since they are written by people of same calibre as the writer of this piece of SH!T) or some websites from disillusioned elements, the author of this artilce has only shown her low class. She belongs to a low class because her thinking is low. Her insinuations are not based on concrete facts. Besides, this article is not about the saint in question. Hence, reference to him was completely unwarranted.
My reply to this ``classless piece`` was a personal one. It did not involve a religion. I did not insult 100 million people as this moronic woman did.
If i do not get a reply or an apology, i will be saying goodbye to this site for ever. It will be painful but i also feel ashamed to share the same podium with people like Farzana bibi who have no class and are at best third rate journalists.
Sridhar
Since Chowk admin has thought it fit to edit out my last post completely, i feel compelled to stop interacting here unless Chowk staff can offer me an explanation.
My last post was a befitting reply to this woman`s insinuation of a person who is revered as a saint by more than 100 million people worldwide. These include people from different nationalites, cultures and professions. By insinuating a saint of wrongdoing, without any proof and just based on some press stories (we know what those stories are about since they are written by people of same calibre as the writer of this piece of SH!T) or some websites from disillusioned elements, the author of this artilce has only shown her low class. She belongs to a low class because her thinking is low. Her insinuations are not based on concrete facts. Besides, this article is not about the saint in question. Hence, reference to him was completely unwarranted.
My reply to this ``classless piece`` was a personal one. It did not involve a religion. I did not insult 100 million people as this moronic woman did.
If i do not get a reply or an apology, i will be saying goodbye to this site for ever. It will be painful but i also feel ashamed to share the same podium with people like Farzana bibi who have no class and are at best third rate journalists.
Sridhar
#127 Posted by rsridhar on June 24, 2004 8:59:59 am
re: my last post and the one that was censured
Lest i be misunderstood, i was replying to the following from farzanabibi`s post # 103
``Why has there been no follow-up regarding the recent allegations against the famous baba who had sexually assaulted a boy? Because he was sanctified by religion?``
The reference to Sathya Sai Baba is obvious. The sentence clearly insinuates a great saint of wrongdoing, without any proof. His followers include people like ABV and Abdul Kalam, the president of India. Perhaps this mornoic piece of SH!T who wrote the above lines thinks she has better knowledge than the above 2 gentlemen. If she has any proof, let us see it.
Either the admin repost my reply to this ``piece of SH!T`` who calls herself a writer, or give me a good explanation. Otherwise, as i said, it is adieus to everybody here.
Sridhar
Lest i be misunderstood, i was replying to the following from farzanabibi`s post # 103
``Why has there been no follow-up regarding the recent allegations against the famous baba who had sexually assaulted a boy? Because he was sanctified by religion?``
The reference to Sathya Sai Baba is obvious. The sentence clearly insinuates a great saint of wrongdoing, without any proof. His followers include people like ABV and Abdul Kalam, the president of India. Perhaps this mornoic piece of SH!T who wrote the above lines thinks she has better knowledge than the above 2 gentlemen. If she has any proof, let us see it.
Either the admin repost my reply to this ``piece of SH!T`` who calls herself a writer, or give me a good explanation. Otherwise, as i said, it is adieus to everybody here.
Sridhar
#126 Posted by soundmeister on June 24, 2004 8:04:03 am
Male homosexuality is perverse. It`s bad enough having to see oneself in the mirror as a man: hair sprouting from places you didn`t know could support life, stupid globes hanging from little shapeless bags, weirdly bent banana shaped protuberances that shrivel up like used peanut shells
eeeeeeyuccccchhhhh
now imagine the same thing, only TWO sets of each, and engaged in fierce combat
I could puke!
Lesbianism on the other hand is sublime.... it`s everything we love about the female form times two! And no skin peeling back and spurting and stuff. More power lesbians! Gay men can go screw themselves
errr, no that didn`t come out right
eeeeeeyuccccchhhhh
now imagine the same thing, only TWO sets of each, and engaged in fierce combat
I could puke!
Lesbianism on the other hand is sublime.... it`s everything we love about the female form times two! And no skin peeling back and spurting and stuff. More power lesbians! Gay men can go screw themselves
errr, no that didn`t come out right
#125 Posted by gujjubania on June 24, 2004 6:55:30 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#124 Posted by Urstruly on June 24, 2004 6:03:22 am
Thank you gujjubania, you are too kind. I know some other hindus who whine even now as to why we introduced the concept of clothing to them. I guess you are one of the enlightened ones.
#123 Posted by gujjubania on June 23, 2004 2:59:36 pm
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#122 Posted by jang on June 23, 2004 11:53:45 am
#120 by soysauce
i think 99% probably includes a quick-furtive, however often, fondling (beyond cheek-pinching or hair-messing) of baba-baby by (usually) a male family aquaintance/servant/neighbor, setting a child in lap/knee, fake fights etc.
victims can tell the difference between an act of molestation and otherwise good-intent contact and dont need a shrink or case worker, and learn to avoid and protest such advances.
this is not the same as ``eve-teasing`` type thing in a crowded bus. consider that western societies are far more careful about casual contact between adults and children unlike in india.
i think 99% probably includes a quick-furtive, however often, fondling (beyond cheek-pinching or hair-messing) of baba-baby by (usually) a male family aquaintance/servant/neighbor, setting a child in lap/knee, fake fights etc.
victims can tell the difference between an act of molestation and otherwise good-intent contact and dont need a shrink or case worker, and learn to avoid and protest such advances.
this is not the same as ``eve-teasing`` type thing in a crowded bus. consider that western societies are far more careful about casual contact between adults and children unlike in india.
#121 Posted by dost_mittar on June 23, 2004 11:06:54 am
stuka:
I did not say that homosexuality was rampant in the RSS, just that such insinuations did get made. I believe that sarsanghchalak is not the only one who is celibate; so are many, if not all pracharaks. And doesn`t sarsanghchalak come from pracharaks? Many of the current BJP leaders, from Vajpayee to Modi, were pracharaks at one time. One of the reasons for their preferred celibacy, I believe, is that pracharaks are generally posted outside their own region and therefore away from a potential family.
kaurasach:
Sorry, never lived in a panjabi village; so can`t help you with that one.
I did not say that homosexuality was rampant in the RSS, just that such insinuations did get made. I believe that sarsanghchalak is not the only one who is celibate; so are many, if not all pracharaks. And doesn`t sarsanghchalak come from pracharaks? Many of the current BJP leaders, from Vajpayee to Modi, were pracharaks at one time. One of the reasons for their preferred celibacy, I believe, is that pracharaks are generally posted outside their own region and therefore away from a potential family.
kaurasach:
Sorry, never lived in a panjabi village; so can`t help you with that one.
#120 Posted by jang on June 23, 2004 10:48:02 am
i know at least 28 shakha pramukh/prcharak types married with kids (dont know if they are happily married). i do know however that RSS is a boys only organization, and they tie ``bhagwa`` rakhee on each-other on rakhee day. so kind of like scouts, if boys only congregate, they must be gay. interesting..what about the army, gents compartments of local trains, the big namaz for eid at the jumma-masjid?
#119 Posted by soysauce on June 23, 2004 10:48:02 am
#107 jawahara
Your 99% figure is startling. Forget about talking to someone in a safe environment. Think back to your childhood. Anything funny happen to you, your siblings & other related children or friends? That should tell you how much to trust these numbers.
Studies on child (sexual) abuse tend to be selectively quoted. Call up a random therapist in this country and ask what he/she has heard about the incidence of sexual abuse. The oft-quoted figure is something like 80%! No one I have spoken to who quotes these high numbers has ever been sexually molested herself! That ought to tell you something.
I do believe that child sexual abuse tends to be overlooked but if you start counting ``eve-teasing`` as sexual abuse (rather than harassment) you`d quickly come up with a large number for urban areas. Moreover, the studies oftentimes have to instruct the children on how to recognize abuse. The line separating instructing them and coaching them is easily crossed tainting the results.
Your 99% figure is startling. Forget about talking to someone in a safe environment. Think back to your childhood. Anything funny happen to you, your siblings & other related children or friends? That should tell you how much to trust these numbers.
Studies on child (sexual) abuse tend to be selectively quoted. Call up a random therapist in this country and ask what he/she has heard about the incidence of sexual abuse. The oft-quoted figure is something like 80%! No one I have spoken to who quotes these high numbers has ever been sexually molested herself! That ought to tell you something.
I do believe that child sexual abuse tends to be overlooked but if you start counting ``eve-teasing`` as sexual abuse (rather than harassment) you`d quickly come up with a large number for urban areas. Moreover, the studies oftentimes have to instruct the children on how to recognize abuse. The line separating instructing them and coaching them is easily crossed tainting the results.
#118 Posted by stuka on June 23, 2004 10:12:54 am
Dost Mittar:
My father was in the RSS. So were other family members. The celibacy rule applies only to the sarsanghchalak. Not the rank and file and not even the pracharaks or various divisions.
My father was in the RSS. So were other family members. The celibacy rule applies only to the sarsanghchalak. Not the rank and file and not even the pracharaks or various divisions.
#117 Posted by scott on June 23, 2004 9:42:34 am
#96 Labyrinth1 ``When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes.``
Presumably when the throne of God shakes it snows on the world.....
Presumably when the throne of God shakes it snows on the world.....
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- pinku: #123 Posted by ElectricSheep... ‘Dustbin of history’ or
- ahmedmadani: Re: # 9 Good... Three Cups of Tea
- MeiraJ08: yes, Morni my city... The Cry of Karachi
- morni: If any one can... The Cry of Karachi
- tahmed32: Tea for you, Masadi... Three Cups of Tea
- tahmed32: yawn...so,how was your weekend,... The Republican Red Scare
- peonofthewest: see how pathetic you... Three Cups of Tea
- altar: I am going to... The Heart of Starkness:








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