Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution? Re: # 82 Manto
Oh! Come on! There has to be more juicy material than that. Nothing in his Collected Works? What about some material from South African rags from the late 19th century?

Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution? Re: # 77 Manto
I was hoping for what your take is on the influence of Gandhi ji on this!

Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution? Re: # 73 Manto
But, don`t you appreciate the fact that Gandhi should get all the credit for India`s 6th placement today (from zero in 1947)? Not bad for someone dead for 60 years!

Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution? Re: # 61 Mantolives
The graph was inserted to prove that Gandhi`s vision and methods are proving themselves today. The result is that India is the world`s 6th most influential country! Ciao

Is this Pakistan’s Democratic Revolution? Re: # 54 Manto

Men in Khaki Re: # 123 Fuzair

``Which bit of it would you find convincing?``

Something that backs up your claims of `hater`. I am assuming, of course, that you can distiguish between criticism and hate. There are several luminaries on Chowk who cannot.

Men in Khaki Re: # 91 Fuzair

``...The author of this ``reliable`` report, B. Raman, is one of the worst Pak-haters in India...``

Care to share any evidence to back your above claim?

Men in Khaki Re: # 81 Tahmed

``“I am blamed for everything,”

That is shameful behavior on the part of the Generalissmo. A ship`s captain is ultmately responsible for its well being. Nobody put a gun to the General`s head to act on Shaukat`s `recommendation` (if indeed that was the case). But if he did, then he should accept responsibility for it and quit blaming others. Also, Musharraf successfuly blamed Nawaz for Kargil -- he is one helluva slippery eel. I say screw the el Presidente. Long live the Chief Justice!

Men in Khaki Re: # 58 Hamidm2
You are not alone. This guy (Syed Jamaluddin) may agree with you.

Pakistan Shinning II - Propoganda or Reality Re: # 55 Bulleya
``...People wanted Nawaz out, which is why they supported him (Musharraf) for three years..``
Actually, Musharraf may have left office within 3 years, except for 9/11. The immense pressure that the GWOT unleashed on Pakistan probably played into Musharraf`s thinking that he alone (and not a civilian government) could see Pakistan through the turbulent years ahead.

Pakistan Shinning I - Propoganda or Reality Re: # 79 Bulleya
This latest blunder by Musharraf is his Kargilgate and will lead to his downfall, just as Kargil precipated Nawaz Sharif`s.

Teaching Science Badly – and Well Re: # 237 Tahmed32

``...keeps demanding an India-Pakistan mudslinging match,...``
Not at all. I just want you to come clean and explain your position. Why don`t you address the specific issues rather than hiding and parrying on unrelated nonsense?

Teaching Science Badly – and Well Re: # 224 bjkumar

Subject #223 Tahmed32

Again, this is less about what `Pakistani terrorists are doing in India` or any other grandiose designs that Pakistan may have over India. It also has less to do with your `classification` of Pakistanis. It has everything to do with exposing the self-righteous (and now shown to be hypocritical) Tahmed32 for all to see. There is also another element: a lack of a call to arms when General Musharraf sends murderous gangs into Afghanistan or India speaks volumes of where Tahmed32`s true sympathies lie (your and my words notwithstanding). Note: he is quick to resort to such calls when these neighbors offer to pay back in the same coin. That is a MATERIAL difference. So, be fooled at your own risk - you saw his reaction to your post in #224.

Also, notice: he is equating this material public exposure of his positions with `hate (for) pakistanis and consider them to be terrorists and hypocrites and so forth`. Where is the connection? Also, if there is a connection at all, ask who is doing the infiltration? and who THEN is likely afflicted by `hate`? All this, the self-righteous Tahmed glosses over.

He could easily have distanced himself from these well-known jihadi efforts by Musharraf with equal vigor, but rather he chose to use racial epithets. What does that tell you about the man?

Krishna_abcd; Arjun: Although reasoning directly with the man may not help him, exposing him for the self-righteous positions that he takes will help clarify for others on Chowk what his ilk stand for.

Teaching Science Badly – and Well Re: # 223 Tahmed32
``...no discussion wiscussion with macacas...``
So you are not above using racial epithets used by discredited American politicians? So much for your self-righteous `respect for even servants` nonsense and `first and foremost developing a good character` (#151). Hypocrite!

Teaching Science Badly – and Well Re: # 205 Tahmed

``....need to engage in india-pakistan mudslinging...``

This has nothing to do with India-Pakistan `mudslinging`, and everything to do with your character and claims of a virtuous upbringing stressing `honesty` and the like; your attempts to weazel away from a discussion on the facts notwithstanding. If you are indeed `honest` as you claim to be, can you explain how you can defend General-President Musharraf with a call to arms when your country`s neighbors threaten to pay back in kind when he sends murderous agents to their civilian centers, but express no such calls to action when he engages in such provocative acts in the first place` that I raised in #177.

This has been my question that you are not willing to address, while trying every means to deflect the discussion on other spurious matters (e.g. india-pakistan mudslinging even though the instance that I cited was of Afghan concerns about Taliban infiltration).

You are exposed on Chowk for all to see! You can run, but can`t hide! Hypocrite!!

Teaching Science Badly – and Well Re: # 197 Tahmed32
``i told you on the other board that i have wasted enough time with you...who think anyone who disagrees with them is a hypocrite etc``

There you go again!

It is not a question of `disagreement` alone as you disingenuously allude to, but rather a failure on your part to clarify your position on the issue of `defending General-President Musharraf with a call to arms when your country`s neighbors threaten to pay back in kind when he sends murderous agents to their civilian centers, but express no such calls to action when he engages in such provocative acts in the first place` that I raised in #177. That is especially galling when you claim to have been raised with `honesty` and other such vacuous `virtuous` claims in your numerous posts.

I suspect that the reason that you consider this a `waste` of time has nothing to do with time (since your million plus posts on Chowk do not amount to any more than a waste of time!) but more with the fact that you are unable to defend your contradictory positions adequately and would rather slide away with your tail between your legs rather than defend yourself openly on Chowk. You are nothing but a run of the mill, self-righteous, patronizing hypocrite!