Recent Terror in Egypt

Re: # 121

I must however put it out - secularism has nothing to do with a perosn`s personal likes or dislikes but is a clear separation of church and state. A secular state would welcome people of all persuasions and ideas personal, private or public, as long as no one subverts this idea of complete religious freedom and equality regardless of religion caste or creed.

Nehru`s, Gandhi`s and indeed Jinnah`s dislike for their offsprings marrying outside the faith might show their own personal contradictions but nothing more.

Re: # 123

Beejay,

I would end our communication with that I believe in what I feel is true and based on fact. You have the right to disagree and hold on to your opinions- right or wrong.

# 122

Or even East Asian.

#121 (Addendum)

In fairness, I must point out that the janitor has no personal knowledge of who individual chowk members hang out with.

In fairness, I should also acknowledge that this author has indicated a vehemently opposing point of view in his writings to what the individual named in #121 stands for! My use of the term “hanging out” was limited to mean “went to the same school”!

I apologize for any inadvertent misinterpretations of that part of #121. The rest of the interact stands! The janitor was mad, that`s all!

(Back to sleep)

Romair#98:

``I think this is the image that par of the USA media has projected``

Are you sure you have been following the British, European or even Canadian media?

(Yawn)

I’m getting really tired of this ping-pong game, but just one more (irresistible) remark!

[…secularism has nothing to do with one`s personal life and/or irreligiousity]
Another pearl of wisdom! Therefore, as long as you talk about secularity, you are okay, you don’t need to practice it personally!

There is another term for individuals who subscribe to a thing in principle, but don’t practice it in personal life. It is called

hypocrite!


In the U.S., we had the North which fought the South over the issue of slavery – because they (in principle) opposed slavery. They won the war, yet for nearly 100 years afterwards – racism continued in both the North and the South (and still does in some pockets and circles) because – they convinced themselves that they did not need to practice it individually! It was a foolish rationalization for continuing the racism and until the 1960’s, they were able to convince themselves that things were working just fine – until the Civil Rights movement woke them up!

Maybe South Asians can learn a few things from U.S. history, and not repeat some of the U.S. mistakes!

But then, I am only a janitor – not a smart-ass lawyer-wannabe from Rutgers who has hung around with the likes of Ramji Yousef!

(Falls asleep)

#119 Soulat:

(Not to be confused with Sau-Laat (100 kicks)!)

My dear creative soul-mate (from the past (life))! I see you are not yet fully recovered – from that episode of Zara, and therefore you are bursting with the huff and puff of Gur-mee!

When you use stuff belonging to others, for example, this website, it is probably a good idea to give attribution – or people might think you wrote it yourself, and when they find out that you did not, they may think you are a plagiarist. (I personally think that you are not a plagiarist (only lazy (like this Hamdaani guy (why do I think he is lazy – because he talks so much!)))).

Therefore, if you ever get accused of something in your life and the detective does not let you off the hook, and you need somebody to defend yourself, you can always hire this Hamdaani guy – the aspiring lawyer – he will never lose your case.

How? He has a very simple formula for winning ALL his cases.

He never stops talking!

Even if somebody beats the pants off his posterior!

Even if somebody leaves his posterior black and blue!

Even if his mouth is full of the dust of the road, having been dragged all through it!

As long as he can hold on to the illusion – and as long as he can keep talking!

After all, it’s all for a good cause – raising his interacts!

An absolutely unique specimen! (And I don’t mean necessarily of the lab variety!)

Enjoy each others (but I don’t (necessarily) mean physically)!

You Know You`re BeeJay If ...

-- You lit a match in the bathroom and your house exploded right off its wheels!

-- The market value of your car goes up and down depending on how much gasoline you put in it.

-- You have to go outside to get something from the fridge.

-- One of your kids was born on a pool table.

-- You can`t get married to your sweetheart because there is a law against it.

-- Your toilet paper has page numbers on it.

-- Your front veranda collapses and kills more than five dogs.

Beejay has a wrong beej up his U know what and he is criminally insane. He belongs here.

Re: # 113

Your claim initially was that he prevented the marriage and this is why his life was more exclusive than say Nehru`s who opposed his daughter`s marriage and then only tried to break it- you insisted on it. You fell flat on your face. (If you challenge this feel free to prove the point that indeed Dina did not marry the person she had hoped to)If Jinnah`s personal life makes ``exclusive`` then Gandhi and Nehru`s personal lives (and their treatment of their children) made them doubly Hindu-exclusive... so I am afraid I fail to see the moral superiority you are getting at.

Ofcourse to a sane human being- you are not, you are intellectually dishonest crook- secularism has nothing to do with one`s personal life and/or irreligiousity. Secularism means a separation of church and state. He was a secularist in state theory always. He always wanted to separate church and state. And he was a secular Indian nationalist for most of his life. Even both of those are separate things.

Re: # 111

Good Maan Di Laantan Mister BJ(I am a member also)

Re: # 114
Thumps Up wala Ikon here.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#112 Hamdaani:

I did read on the topic as much as I could within the time available to me (and most people like me). I believe the accusation that Jinnah personally had a “Muslim exclusive” mind has legitimacy, validated by his treatment of his own daughter. You deny this obvious fact or side-step it (by bringing in Gandhi and others – especially since I never said anything regarding those gentlemen (for all I know, they may have had “exclusive” minds too, but I am talking about YOUR hero for now)). THAT makes you intellectually dishonest.

The accusation stands! It does not matter how you plead. In fact, your spontaneous words (in blowing up and using expletives) have spoken a LOT louder than your crafted words – conclusively establishing that you have no objectivity on certain topics. Since you claim to be objective, it reinforces the argument that you indeed ARE a hypocrite!

Re: # 111

Since you were unable to prove your assertions and proved yourself to be a hypocrite of the highest order- it was nice chatting with you.

Next time before you mouth off -read on the topic.

#106 Hamdaani:

[If you were so concerned about foul language…]
Actually, I’m not. I believe in free speech.

[…why the hell did you start off by calling me a hypocrite]
Because, it’s accurate! (By the way, “hypocrite” is not considered a foul word.)

[… why must you resort to abuse ?]
Actually, you did!

[..And why then must you cry like a baby when you are given a taste of your own f_uking medicine?]
And you continue to use similar language. (By the way, I’m laughing!)

[... but oh no like every Indian you are a know all (despite the fact that you don`t know shit_)]
Gross and sweeping generalizations regarding Indians and MORE foul language! (Perhaps you also harbor a deeply rooted inferiority complex with regard to India and Indians! By the way, I consider myself a PROUD American.)

[…like every Indian you must prove that all that is Pakistani is inferior ... and all that is Indian is superior...]
Some bitter past experiences with Indians, I see!