An Answer to the Pro War Surrealists

#109 ferozk

Hope you are right. And, yes, we also need to deal with the fantasists on our side who think that the only problem in J&K is that it needs more army forces, or, even worse that by attacking their muslim neighbors they are striking a blow for bharat mata.

#100 tahmed32


I have no idea why you are ranting at me about insulting muslims in general. I have only commented on your bizarre analysis of J&K violence.

pmishra: You dont read too well do you.
Or maybe you find it convenient to keep dragging Kashmir in, while avoiding the point I made: your uncalled for INSULTS TO THE MUSLIM COMMUNITY IN GENERAL. THAT is what I objected too. I couldnt care less about where the border is drawn in kashmir.
And so far, between you and ferozk, I am demented, hypocritical and a murderer like hafiz saeed. If personal insults bothered me, I would be ignoring people like you (as most chowkies do).
I wont be writing anymore here (although if you write some really smart personal insults rather than these half-assed ones, I might change my mind). Meanwhile, for once I have brought the muslim chauvinist and the hindu chauvinist (you and ferozk) together. Not a bad day`s work.

Re: pmishra2 # 108

It is futile! Trust me, I know!

The good thing is that Kashmir will be sorted out once this mess in the middle east is over. I hope that India agrees to a settlement with Pakistan, because as sure as a snow ball melts in hell, the LOC is the reality of the situation and neither side can change that without a major disaster. The sooner Kashmir is solved, the sooner the caus celebre of these militants will disappear and sooner, the people of both the nations can concentrate on more important things.

Ciao

#108 tahmed32

Heh, heh ! Very good indeed. Yes, you are so-o-o correct --- the violence in J&K is somehow due to the indian goverment or at least the hindus. They are the guys responsible for all the violence. Even better,
``some Indian posters who had mentioned ....`` about something or the other related to J&K.

Case is closed. This is very high-level and even handed analysis.
Keep up the lectures on sincerity and honesty for the rest of us. Remind us of our secular and democratic heritage while you indulge in your ugly double-speak....


Question: What is the difference is tahmed32 and Hafiz Saeed?

Answer: Hafiz Saeed is a straight-talker and an open bigot, tahmed32 is not even that.

AlephNull #106 My point, as should have been clear to you on reading my post, was not about Kashmir (I leave that to the chowk warriors who can go round and round that same issue ad infinitum). My point was about the uncalled for insults to muslims that pmishra had posted, and I assume that such insults are OK with you too. So be it.

Not that it matters, I do recall that there was something about the BJP government making some moves to tie Kashmir more closely to India, and I believe it was some Indian posters who had mentioned that triggered this violence in Kashmir. But if that is not true, I stand corrected. I am simply not interested in these legalistic discussions by chowk warriors.

Tahmed #85 writes:

{{c. Recognize that the current round of violence in kashmir was triggered by the BJP govt when it came to power a decade or so ago and changed the constitutional status of Kashmir. …. }}

This statement lies squarely in the domain of fact, not opinion. The BJP-led government’s unbroken term in office dates to March 1998, i.e. five years ago plus a couple of weeks. ‘Lustrum’, not ‘decade’, is perhaps the word for which Professor Ahmed is groping. [There was a prior thirteen-day Vajpayee government in 1996, which resigned without facing a vote of confidence.]

As to changing the constitutional status of Jammu & Kashmir, I’m sadly unaware of any such move having been carried out in the last twenty years at least. It is a humbling experience to have my ignorance about my own country repeatedly shown up by some Pakistani panjandrum or other. So I implore Professor T. Ahmed to provide details of this legislation of which I am unable to uncover any trace. He is, of course, aware of the kind of parliamentary majority needed to amend the Indian constitution.

I would hate to think that the reason I was unable to uncover any constitutional change of the sort that Professor T. Ahmed refers to, is that there was none; and that this statement reflects the learned professor’s true grasp of a subject on which he lectures so authoritatively. That would gravely undermine my faith in the soundness of all his opinions on interstate relations in the Indian subcontinent.

pmishra2 #104 I will ignore your insults. And I will ignore your attempt to change the subject by cutting and pasting for discussion something I had written to someone else.

The reason I said people like you are a waste of education is, as you know quite well, because of that unprovoked insults to muslims that you posted on this board and which seems to be the only thing people like you seem capable of talking about. This hindu-muslim communalism belongs in the shit!ty streets you grew up in, not on on this board and not on chowk.

tahmed32 #85


I can see that you have passed from occassional delirium to complete dementia:

[quote]
c. Recognize that the current round of violence in kashmir was triggered by the BJP govt when it came to power a decade or so ago and changed the constitutional status of Kashmir. Then do what it takes to undo the hostitlity.
[end-quote]

Huh? I guess this is an event known only to you. But heh, whatever, after all folks like you are happy to argue that the indian goverment is behind all of the horrific civilian killings in J&K. And that mass murders like Hafiz Saeed and Azhar are ``freedom fighters``...

ferozk #102 This is the third time you have called me a hypocrite while ignoring for the third time the explanation I have provided on why India is not the US and Pakistan is not Iraq. You accuse me of ignoring your questions, when in fact I have (despite your namecalling) responded to your basic question as I just mentioned.

I try not to say anything on chowk that I would consider beneath me to say to a person in real life. I hope for your sake that you are a better behaved man in real life than you are on chowk. Since a grown up man would look very stupid calling people hypocrites and generally behaving as you have done on these interactions.

And spare me your ciao`s and sirs and ``my dear friends`` - since that doesnt make any sense when you call me names at the same time. Anyway, end of discussion.

re: tahmed

You say that I should ask questions. When I do, you do not answer them. Maybe the fault is not with the pupil; maybe the problem lies with the teacher; a teacher who is unsure of what he is teaching and does not understand the questions being asked of him. You say that I should undertand your ``lectures``, but how am I to understand without asking questions? I favor the socratic method over lectures. Lectures are for rote learning and all they do is tell a story, but not the reasons for its understandings.

Teachers, who lecture like to pontificate, look pompus and are impressed up their own egos. They like the docile pupils, who never dare to ask them questions lest their own ignorance be proven.

You instruct me, but you have always side stepped my questions and not answered one of them and then you have the gall and the insensitivity to tutor me. Sir, you are after all, what I said you were - a hypocrite!

Good bye to you, sir!

Ciao

Just like to say that sometimes you have to, in Bob Marley`s words,
Get up, stand up
Stand up for your right,
Get up, stand up
Dont give up the fight.

ali87 #98 FINALLY you liked something I wrote. I think I better quit while I am ahead. :-)

#94 by tahmed32 on April 14, 2003 6:52am PT


All the same you have sidestepped the issue again.

You would do well in the PR business.

#94 by tahmed32 on April 14, 2003 6:52am PT

difficult to provoke you is it? :)

ferozk #96 you write ``do the North Koreans, the Syrians, Iranians, Pakistanis and others also deserve the good fortune, which is befelling the Iraqis?``

We already covered this lesson also. Please refer to my earlier lecture on why Pakistan is not Iraq (and Musharaff not Saddam - hint: the one where I refer to the absence in Pakistan under Musharaff of Iraq-like torture cells, Big Man Idols, snipping off of tongues of opposition; and the presence in Pakistan of a free press and a certain level of democratic institutions and traditions that will clearly grow with time).

This is why it is so important to take notes and understand the material that is delivered. And to ask questions if you dont understand anything. It is very embarrassing to have one of my students come back asking questions about things that have already been taught in class.

I know you dont wish me ill, but thanks for the best wishes anyway. We are not engaged in any life and death struggle on chowk, just passing some time when we should be doing our taxes or something.

Re: tahmed32

You wrote, ``... What stopped the Indian army from walking into Pakistan last year was not some judicial decision passed by the Delhi or Lahore High Court, but Pakistani missiles and nukes.``

Hence, what is stopping America from attacking North Korea is the missiles and the nukes and since Iraq had none, it was easy to attack.

Don`t you see the hypocricy in this? Are you even aware of the conterdictions? Tahmed, by all means defend the United States, but please defend the United States realistically. I will, as per your wishes, put the people first and ask you this simply: do the North Koreans, the Syrians, Iranians, Pakistanis and others also deserve the good fortune, which is befelling the Iraqis? If what you say is so noble and good, when is the United States going to fight a war and liberate and free us from the yoke of our oppression? Do we need oil in order to be liberated?

You may refuse to see the double standards, but that does not make them disappear.

Best wishes and a good life to you and may you always prosper.

Sincerely

Feroz R. Khan

Ciao