Temporal November 24, 2004
#75 Posted by kasi on December 9, 2004 7:24:55 am
It is a real good. This is melanchalous, full of sorrows in the words. What is the matter? Can you share them with me. I am also little sorrowful.
you can mail your comments thru kasi_saro@yahoo.com or kasi_vis@hotmail.com
I have also some articles under unplugged fiction under name kasi and sarovis
Take care, best of luck kasi
you can mail your comments thru kasi_saro@yahoo.com or kasi_vis@hotmail.com
I have also some articles under unplugged fiction under name kasi and sarovis
Take care, best of luck kasi
#74 Posted by sadna on December 1, 2004 12:05:58 pm
plats8 #73
``Could you please explain to me where I have legitimized abuse here ?``
By your (as I see it) disproportionate response to just one post of mine written about dozens and dozens of abusive dishonest posts. Because, yes I have failed to understand your point.
``By the way, I don`t think such labels are all that calculated - they`re just not that sophisticated, abuse-wise. For a certain set of people, labelling is a natural reaction when they fail to debate on substantive issues. If one has enough energy or time, it is also rather easy to demolish them.``
That is purely your prerogative. Thanks for the discussion `nyways.
#73 Posted by plats8 on December 1, 2004 10:58:22 am
Sadna #71,
I think I am failing to make my point. Could you please explain to me where
I have legitimized abuse here ? I very well may have, but a pointer would help.
By the way, I don`t think such labels are all that calculated - they`re just not that
sophisticated, abuse-wise. For a certain set of people, labelling is a natural reaction
when they fail to debate on substantive issues. If one has enough energy or time, it
is also rather easy to demolish them.
I think I am failing to make my point. Could you please explain to me where
I have legitimized abuse here ? I very well may have, but a pointer would help.
By the way, I don`t think such labels are all that calculated - they`re just not that
sophisticated, abuse-wise. For a certain set of people, labelling is a natural reaction
when they fail to debate on substantive issues. If one has enough energy or time, it
is also rather easy to demolish them.
#72 Posted by sadna on November 30, 2004 10:11:58 pm
plats8 #70
``the anti-Muslim label is sort of a knee-jerk reaction,and not really cultivated abuse. Would you agree ?``
Not at all. The label is used in a deliberate and calculated way to de-legitimize the other guy`s POV with no effort.
btw, if you see how Hindutva-vadis argue, one of their first arguments is to call someone disagreeing with them `anti-Hindu`. I doubt you would as happy to explain that away. It is a empty and meaningless argument, which is why such an accusation comes along with a supporting chorus.
``I am not legitimizing abuse in any form.``
You could have fooled me. The citizens of the 6th largest country had better grow up soon - stop shielding them in your skirts.
#71 Posted by rsaxena on November 30, 2004 10:11:58 pm
tahmed shown up
runs out the door...shameless creature
runs out the door...shameless creature
#70 Posted by plats8 on November 30, 2004 7:24:18 pm
Sadna #69,
Arre, aap naaraaz kyun ho gaye ? I am not trying to defend anyone or anything; quite
content with letting people fight their own battles. These were just random observations
that I wanted to share. I have been accused of being a mullah and rabidly anti-Muslim
in the same thread at chowk - people often see what they want to see.
My understanding is that the anti-Muslim label is sort of a knee-jerk reaction,
and not really cultivated abuse. Would you agree ? Mind you, I am not legitimizing
abuse in any form.
Arre, aap naaraaz kyun ho gaye ? I am not trying to defend anyone or anything; quite
content with letting people fight their own battles. These were just random observations
that I wanted to share. I have been accused of being a mullah and rabidly anti-Muslim
in the same thread at chowk - people often see what they want to see.
My understanding is that the anti-Muslim label is sort of a knee-jerk reaction,
and not really cultivated abuse. Would you agree ? Mind you, I am not legitimizing
abuse in any form.
#69 Posted by sadna on November 30, 2004 5:43:55 pm
plats8 #68
If you want to defend abusers and be an accessory in their essential dishonesty, that is your choice, not mine.
And if they did not resort to tantrums and nautankis and blanket accusations of being anti-Muslim on encountering disagreement, they would have fewer existential problems.
And IMO people from a country which now has the 6th largest population in the world have no business whining about existential problems and victimhood, that too so many years after independence. They have just overtaken Russia, so whats next Russians whining about how victimised they are.
If you want to defend abusers and be an accessory in their essential dishonesty, that is your choice, not mine.
And if they did not resort to tantrums and nautankis and blanket accusations of being anti-Muslim on encountering disagreement, they would have fewer existential problems.
And IMO people from a country which now has the 6th largest population in the world have no business whining about existential problems and victimhood, that too so many years after independence. They have just overtaken Russia, so whats next Russians whining about how victimised they are.
#68 Posted by sadna on November 30, 2004 2:02:07 pm
ana #64
``(didn`t know you read `em)``
Indeed I do, occasionally and when the subj. is general (not personal). You write well :).
``(didn`t know you read `em)``
Indeed I do, occasionally and when the subj. is general (not personal). You write well :).
#67 Posted by plats8 on November 30, 2004 2:02:07 pm
Sadna #65,
Of course. I was merely pointing out the qualitatively different targets for gaaliya-s
in the two cases. About generally labeling Indians as anti-Muslim (which many Indians
are) and thanking god, Jinnah and everyone else for Pakistan, there are real existential
issues there; not that I agree with them, but they do exist.
Of course. I was merely pointing out the qualitatively different targets for gaaliya-s
in the two cases. About generally labeling Indians as anti-Muslim (which many Indians
are) and thanking god, Jinnah and everyone else for Pakistan, there are real existential
issues there; not that I agree with them, but they do exist.
#66 Posted by tahmed32 on November 30, 2004 2:01:50 pm
ana #64 As I said in #63 (where I have also summarized what I have to say on this), I am have wasted enough time setting the record straight with saxena and so will not be responding to any more of his posts.
I am glad you confirmed that you you did not call me a liar in your post, and this exposes yet another misrepresentation made by saxena (in #62), and one where he obviously would have failed to meet the challenge I made for him to back his claims or to stand exposed as a liar (just as he has failed to meet my previous challenges regarding his earlier misrepresentations).
I will accept that I have not come out as strong with Salim as I have with some Indian posters for similar language, and perhaps being of the same nationality has contributed to this bias. But at least, as you note, I have at least brought this to Salim`s attention - albeit in a less harsh manner - which is still more than can be said for ANY indian poster on chowk, I am sorry to say (other than Stuka, who used to try to confront his abusive countrymen, and then seems to have given up): thus, gb routinely writes lewd posts directed to Pakistani female posters and to female members of Pakistani male posters, and NOT ONE indian male has had the moral courage - not even the decent ones among them of whom I have always spoken highly - to take him to task, even in the gentle manner I have in case of Salim. Indeed, I appreciate that you are saying what you feel, rather than trying to take sides as a ``fellow pakistani``. Also note, that I have in the past been as strongly worded with pakistani posters when they have ridiculed hindus (ask urstruly, to take a prime example). So, while I dont claim to be free from biases, I do try to be fair. But your point is a good one in any case, since it is not good to be biased against any group of people.
I am glad you confirmed that you you did not call me a liar in your post, and this exposes yet another misrepresentation made by saxena (in #62), and one where he obviously would have failed to meet the challenge I made for him to back his claims or to stand exposed as a liar (just as he has failed to meet my previous challenges regarding his earlier misrepresentations).
I will accept that I have not come out as strong with Salim as I have with some Indian posters for similar language, and perhaps being of the same nationality has contributed to this bias. But at least, as you note, I have at least brought this to Salim`s attention - albeit in a less harsh manner - which is still more than can be said for ANY indian poster on chowk, I am sorry to say (other than Stuka, who used to try to confront his abusive countrymen, and then seems to have given up): thus, gb routinely writes lewd posts directed to Pakistani female posters and to female members of Pakistani male posters, and NOT ONE indian male has had the moral courage - not even the decent ones among them of whom I have always spoken highly - to take him to task, even in the gentle manner I have in case of Salim. Indeed, I appreciate that you are saying what you feel, rather than trying to take sides as a ``fellow pakistani``. Also note, that I have in the past been as strongly worded with pakistani posters when they have ridiculed hindus (ask urstruly, to take a prime example). So, while I dont claim to be free from biases, I do try to be fair. But your point is a good one in any case, since it is not good to be biased against any group of people.
#65 Posted by ana on November 30, 2004 11:05:21 am
i think you both need to stop this and move on. . . you`re both sounding rather juvenile.
tahmed sahib,
just as you feel that rsaxena implied all pakistanis are vermin (i know that rsax does not consider me to be vermin) i did imply in my post to you that you are being biased. calling rsaxena an abusive freak, and tapping salim ever so gently wherever when he is being ``abusive`` to women on unplugged clearly shows bias on your part. and that intrigues me. so while i have not called you a liar, i have questioned your bias. rsax is not too far off the mark here.
sadna,
thanks for responding to my ilog. (didn`t know you read `em) point taken. :)
tahmed sahib,
just as you feel that rsaxena implied all pakistanis are vermin (i know that rsax does not consider me to be vermin) i did imply in my post to you that you are being biased. calling rsaxena an abusive freak, and tapping salim ever so gently wherever when he is being ``abusive`` to women on unplugged clearly shows bias on your part. and that intrigues me. so while i have not called you a liar, i have questioned your bias. rsax is not too far off the mark here.
sadna,
thanks for responding to my ilog. (didn`t know you read `em) point taken. :)
#64 Posted by sadna on November 30, 2004 11:05:21 am
plats#59
``Pakistanis are sensitive about being Muslim``
Yes, but that is no reason to term anyone who disagrees with them `anti-Muslim`. They aren`t the only Muslims in the world.
``Pakistanis are sensitive about being Muslim``
Yes, but that is no reason to term anyone who disagrees with them `anti-Muslim`. They aren`t the only Muslims in the world.
#63 Posted by tahmed32 on November 30, 2004 10:05:15 am
rsaxena #62: You are lying yet again!! If you wish to prove otherwise, I challenge you (yet again!!) to cut and paste where this poster (ana) called me a ``biased liar`` or even indicated anything to this affect. Like the coward that you are, you now hide behind a Pakistani poster (in other words, a ``Pakistani vermin`` to use your own words about Pakistanis, whom you have been routinely insulting and putting down for years on chowk even though). Your post (and the ones before) are proof that to cover up one lie, a liar ultimately tangles himself up in a web of a hundred lies.
When I apply some adjective to you (e.g. two-faced, foul-mouthed, lying, cowardly abuser, freak), I base it on what you have written and can easily back it up. (see above, e.g., or #55 and #56 e.g., which you have carefully ignored and where I discussed at length why your behavior is part of the typical profile of an abusive individual).
You on the other hand have been merely tossing back the same empty claim that I am a liar over and over again, but without being able to back this claim even once, even after I have explicitly challenged you to back your words by cutting and pasting what I have written. .
I have wasted enough time with a pathetic specimen like you. I will not respond to any more posts you may write (retaining, as always, by right to change my mind).
When I apply some adjective to you (e.g. two-faced, foul-mouthed, lying, cowardly abuser, freak), I base it on what you have written and can easily back it up. (see above, e.g., or #55 and #56 e.g., which you have carefully ignored and where I discussed at length why your behavior is part of the typical profile of an abusive individual).
You on the other hand have been merely tossing back the same empty claim that I am a liar over and over again, but without being able to back this claim even once, even after I have explicitly challenged you to back your words by cutting and pasting what I have written. .
I have wasted enough time with a pathetic specimen like you. I will not respond to any more posts you may write (retaining, as always, by right to change my mind).
#62 Posted by rsaxena on November 30, 2004 6:48:48 am
tauheed, a pakistani is showing you up for the biased liar you are....not me...directing your anger at me is not going to help here
#61 Posted by tahmed32 on November 29, 2004 9:41:34 pm
saxena: you can keep lying and i`ll keep setting you straight, you damned freak. Having been proven a liar in my post #55 and your abusive personality exposed in my post #56. Now go to hell.
as for feeling sorry - you are the one with depressions, not me. damned lying, abusive freak!!
as for feeling sorry - you are the one with depressions, not me. damned lying, abusive freak!!
#60 Posted by rsaxena on November 29, 2004 8:36:46 pm
ana
you`re right to let it go...let tauheed drown in his own web of bias, lies, and hypocrisy (and now filth - check out his friend salim on unplugged)....at his age, i actually feel sorry for the guy...
you`re right to let it go...let tauheed drown in his own web of bias, lies, and hypocrisy (and now filth - check out his friend salim on unplugged)....at his age, i actually feel sorry for the guy...
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- hurricane: Re: # 24 chaccha... And Then There Was
- hurricane: Who's redflagging? Hey, it's... And Then There Was
- tahmed32: hurricane: sorry bro (or... And Then There Was
- krishna_abcd: Pakistan - An Islamic... And Then There Was
- hurricane: Those that know me,... And Then There Was
- tahmed32: #20 india monkeyman speakee... And Then There Was
- _arjun15: #19 Posted by... And Then There Was
- tahmed32: HP #17 while agreeing... And Then There Was








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