Pardon, didn’t mean to kill you...

rsribore

Yr comment/reply (??) proves the point I am trying to make and that is that u don`t get the point.My main question is ``why the obsession?`` and u catch onto anything and everything but that. Your gift to misinterpret and cheapen something whether it is an ancient Egyptian name or anything else is awesome. I don`t want to ever go down to that creepy-crawly level so u won`t hear from me again if u do pick on my interacts after this.

#65, {``Get a life..why this obsession with condoms and incest, bhayya?? ``}

Now that you addressed me as a brotherly figure, I must correct you. Using a nic that resembles the name of a female Pharoah of Egypt, where they encourages brothers and sisters to produce offsprings, and the vernacular for mammary glands, you then ask a question about incest and condoms. Suffice it to say - if you are into incest, at least use a comdom. :)

Salim aka rsribhar aka Premwalla

Re: # 63
rsribore,
That was really clever....you ought to be writing the kind of UN go-nowhere reports which further confuse issues with a diarrhoea of words in an effort to be clever. Get a life..why this obsession with condoms and incest, bhayya??

#54 by Romair

[It is very dangerous to try to turn terrorism into simply a religious issue. That is usually done to isolate it to one group, primarily to hide State terrorism. It thus allows one group to justify its acts, against another, in either direction. ]


Nobody has turned terrorism into a religious issue. However, the overhelming majority of terrorists are Muslim.
And Islam is the only religion that condones, encourages, and provides an instruction manual for terrorism.

Tamil tigers are equally bad when they kill innocents, but there is no support from Hindus worldwide for it on a religious basis.


[The best way to handle terrorism is to first define it, and include all innocent killings, under the definition, without trying to justify those by a State or by any individual, regardless of religion, race or creed. The fact that the UN has been unable to agree on one definition, yet, shows how hard that is to do.]

Unfortunately, a HUGE number of countries in the UN are Islamic. This prevents getting the definition codified.



[This is primarily because certain States are unwilling to accept the concept of State terrorism. ]

No democratic state TARGETS INNOCENT MEN WOMEN AND CHILDREN

THEY MAY BE UNAVOIDABLE VICTIMS, BECAUSE ELEMENTS AMONGST THEM ARE HARBORING AND NURTURING TERRORISTS.

(An exception is for example the USA in Hiroshima/Nagasaki).

#62, Neferitty,
I used the word ``comdemn`` that means to preserve or to protect. It is related to the word ``condom`` which has a similar meaning for different reasons. Both words then produce the common term ``condominium`` which is an aggregate of ``condom`` and ``pandemonium.`` It refers to a building that has unrestricted preservation.

You did not know that I was an entymologist - That is a person who studies incest.

Your friend,
Salim

to #59
rsribore,
...poor you, can`t follow simple language, huh? never mind, I forgive u for you know not what u do....

Pmishra2
No, I am not related to Amar, Akbar, or Anthony, that I know of. That`s no joke. :)

I do agree with you about India (except for our soldiers) being fortunate to stay out of the two WWs in Europe. Too bad, Jinnah and Nehru did not learn from those tragedies and come up with a plan to save Indians (Hindus, Muslims, and Sikhs) from the horrors of partition.

Nice interacting with you.

Salim Premwalla Rsribhar Kardesh Barachota KKKandK Nangaparbat :)

Anything to circumvent Chowk`s prejudice against me.

#32 salim premwala

Are you Amar Akbar Anthony`s cousin? That`s a joke but I like your handle..

Many people and cultures have suffered thru history. Actually most muslims and indians luckily missed the european death festival of 1914-1917 and 1939-1945. However, soon after bevakoof Jinnah and maha-bevakoof Nehru played out their little grudge match in India (OK, its more complicated than that).

#58, Nefertitty,
I agree! We shoud comdemn civilized behavior anywhere in the world. :)

Re: # 57
Correct... the only thing that doesn`t change colour is money, which only changes hands after it is made in dubious ways and is used to fund acts that any civilized person any where in the world would condemn.

#56, Amazing how invasions can result in changes in hair color. Does Clairol know this?

#52, Arjun {``If you were red-headed, you were singled out for attention. Don`t ask me how that makes sense``}

Just one interesting trivial comment. The Irish were mostly dark-haired. Thanks to the Viking invasions, many Irish became members of the Red-Headed League, but that is an Arthur Conan Doyle problem. :)
Salim

Romair#54:

You are really comparing apples with jamuns. The support of Irish Americans for IRA is similar to your support for Lashkar-e-Taiba or Jaish-e-Mohammad terrorism directed at IHK. No catholic christians from Pakistan, France, Italy or even U.K supported the IRA. As for Mcveigh, I never read about any support for him in Montana or Idaho, so there was no question of profiling the good citizens of those states.

P.S. Both bongdongs and I have answered your questions on the hamdani board. I presume that you are satisfied with the answers.

Dost-Mittar #51: “It is not just that they were white, but that there was no sympathy whatsoever among the catholics or christians in general for their acts. Their case could be compared, if at all, to those who tried to capture the holy mosque at Kaaba in 1979.”

This is not quite correct.

1. In 30 years between 1971-2001, IRA has carried out 116 bombings in London, alone. Yet the IRA has always had a huge amount of sympathy, amongst many Catholics. Sinn Fenn, is the most popular Irish Nationalist political party, and is a direct ally of the IRA!! Obviously, Sinn Fenn and its Irish followers have had a lot of, “sympathy” for the IRA.

The main financial sources of funding for the IRA, for years have been Boston and New York. There are movies made about IRA operatives hiding in New England. So obviously, there is a great deal of direct support amongst Irish Catholics, within the USA, for the IRA cause; despite 116 bombings in London. Even the names of the Irish Catholic Kennedy family have been mentioned in this regard.

2. Timothy McVeigh had no sympathy, other then amongst his tiny group. That sympathy would have grown exponentially had the USA not handled his case correctly. The US govt. surgically cornered, caught and tried McVeigh. It did not go and bomb Idaho, and kill 100,000 people there. Better yet, it did not bomb neighboring Montana and/or Wyoming, and kill 100,000 people there. Had it done so, I am sure quite a few people would have started sympathizing with McVeigh.

It is very dangerous to try to turn terrorism into simply a religious issue. That is usually done to isolate it to one group, primarily to hide State terrorism. It thus allows one group to justify its acts, against another, in either direction.

The best way to handle terrorism is to first define it, and include all innocent killings, under the definition, without trying to justify those by a State or by any individual, regardless of religion, race or creed. The fact that the UN has been unable to agree on one definition, yet, shows how hard that is to do. This is primarily because certain States are unwilling to accept the concept of State terrorism.

Once a definition is in place, then all killings of innocents, regardless of who ordered them, including those carried out in occupations or in individual terrorist acts, should be prosecuted under terrorism. That is what will end it.

Otherwise, each side will continue to justify its acts, while vilifying the other side’s acts………….What I find interesting is that there are such large groups present who are unwilling to look to accept all acts of militarism, as terrorism, while they simultaneously try to point out other people’s support for terrorism………..

The solution highlighted in this article, of drying out the swamp, is absolutely correct. It’s about time people accepted it, without attaching, “if ands or buts.” And stopped justifying any kind of terrorism – individual or State. The reason McVeigh had no takers was because their was no swamp, created by the State. The reason IRA has had a lot of takers and supporters, is because there is a swamp created by the State.

The difference should be obvious to everyone………..Prosecution across the board, for anyone killing innocents is what is needed. Unfortunately, I don’t see that happening anytime soon……….

CAN WE DO ANYTHING ELSE.. THAN JUST BLOG OUR FEELING HERE AND THERE?? DOES ANYONE BOTHERS TO EVADE THE CAUSE OF IT? DO WE TRY AND DO DOMETHING TO PREVENT THIS TERROR ON THE NAME OF RELIGION? CAN WE THINK OF EDUCATING THESE FOOLISH FUNDAMENTALISTS?

THINK OVER PEOPLE! GROW UP! ELSE IT COULD BE (GOD FORBID) `WE` AMONGST THOSE WHO MET SUCH AN END...

ACtually the brits did racially profile. If you were red-headed, you were singled out for attention. Don`t ask me how that makes sense....I just heard it from someone who fought the battles during the IRA years.