rangeelaraja Posted March 12 Author Posted March 12 (edited) 2 hours ago, Mariyam said: Kirti Azad is a Hindu! Thats an exceptionally sharp observation. But being a Hindu doesn’t give him the Azadi to virtue-signal or create the impression that every time Hindus seek blessings at temples or express gratitude through their faith, they should feel guilty or be shamed simply because they are the majority. Even scientists at the ISRO have often followed similar traditions for decades. Edited March 12 by rangeelaraja
coffee_rules Posted March 12 Posted March 12 (edited) 1 hour ago, Mariyam said: Kirti Azad is a Hindu! No he is not. We disown him , he is secular. Seculars hate Hindus as much as radical Islamists. They don’t hate others as they are “minorities” Edited March 12 by coffee_rules
Texy Posted March 12 Posted March 12 3 hours ago, Mariyam said: Kirti Azad is a Hindu! by name only Mariyam 1
Lord Posted March 12 Posted March 12 3 hours ago, Mariyam said: Kirti Azad is a Hindu! Politicians' religion is politics only Mariyam and Throwaib_Chuckter 1 1
Mariyam Posted March 12 Posted March 12 3 hours ago, rangeelaraja said: Thats an exceptionally sharp observation. But being a Hindu doesn’t give him the Azadi to virtue-signal or create the impression that every time Hindus seek blessings at temples or express gratitude through their faith, they should feel guilty or be shamed simply because they are the majority. Even scientists at the ISRO have often followed similar traditions for decades. 1) Had to make sharp observations. You were okay attributing to Muslims/non Hindus what was essentially said by someone who calls himself a Hindu. You turned a blind eye. Another interesting observation is that Kirti Azad was in the BJP for close to 30 years! 2) Your second comment belies your understanding of the what freedom of expression means. He *has* the Azadi to make whatever comment he wishes to as long as it is not inimical to other beliefs. His comments aren’t. They are just retarded. And They have been panned. But he has all the right to say it. He saying what he did is constitutional. 3) They could take the trophy anywhere for all I care. Mandir. Masjid. Padel court at CCI.
Mariyam Posted March 12 Posted March 12 3 hours ago, coffee_rules said: No he is not. We disown him , he is secular. Seculars hate Hindus as much as radical Islamists. They don’t hate others as they are “minorities” You can’t disown him. He has declared his religion as Hinduism on his filing papers. Only in the Saffron Reich that exists in your imagination and the Narnia like closets that exist in certain basements in New Jersey can you excommunicate him. Throwaib_Chuckter, coffee_rules and Lord 2 1
coffee_rules Posted March 12 Posted March 12 56 minutes ago, Mariyam said: You can’t disown him. He has declared his religion as Hinduism on his filing papers. Only in the Saffron Reich that exists in your imagination and the Narnia like closets that exist in certain basements in New Jersey can you excommunicate him. You take it literally, the excommunication is just a figure of speech to say that he’s irrelevant to Hindus. Mariyam and Lord 1 1
coffee_rules Posted March 12 Posted March 12 (edited) More heartburn for Azad and his ilk Il On a side-note, Why is Tamil in new clips so different from colonial Tamil? Edited March 12 by coffee_rules
BacktoCricaddict Posted March 12 Posted March 12 55 minutes ago, coffee_rules said: More heartburn for Azad and his ilk Il On a side-note, Why is Tamil in new clips so different from colonial Tamil? This is Sentamizh. It's like if Kannada news was in Halegannada. coffee_rules 1
Lord Posted March 12 Posted March 12 1 hour ago, coffee_rules said: More heartburn for Azad and his ilk Il On a side-note, Why is Tamil in new clips so different from colonial Tamil? 14 km non stop walk? coffee_rules 1
rangeelaraja Posted March 12 Author Posted March 12 (edited) 6 hours ago, Mariyam said: 1) Had to make sharp observations. You were okay attributing to Muslims/non Hindus what was essentially said by someone who calls himself a Hindu. You turned a blind eye. Another interesting observation is that Kirti Azad was in the BJP for close to 30 years! 2) Your second comment belies your understanding of the what freedom of expression means. He *has* the Azadi to make whatever comment he wishes to as long as it is not inimical to other beliefs. His comments aren’t. They are just retarded. And They have been panned. But he has all the right to say it. He saying what he did is constitutional. 3) They could take the trophy anywhere for all I care. Mandir. Masjid. Padel court at CCI. Clearly, you completely missed the exaggeration in my comment, particularly when I said you made an “exceptionally” sharp observation, along with the hyperbole and sarcasm in the rest of the post. Of course, Kirti Azad is free to say whatever he wants. India is a democracy with freedom of expression. If someone like Rakhi Sawant can say whatever she wishes, Kirti Azad certainly can as well. What surprises me, however, is that with your world phamous sense of humor, you managed to miss the subtle sarcasm, exaggeration, and hyperbole in someone else’s comment and instead chose to take it so seriously. Or is an exotic sense of humor a privilege reserved only for you, Mariyam Ji ? 5 hours ago, coffee_rules said: You take it literally, the excommunication is just a figure of speech to say that he’s irrelevant to Hindus. Same to same. She got so serious about my sarcastic post, full of exaggeration and hyperbole. What's the matter @Mariyam ?? Edited March 12 by rangeelaraja Mariyam 1
Throwaib_Chuckter Posted March 12 Posted March 12 Azad is azad to say what he wants. How much importance we accord to what he says is up to us as individuals, that's the beauty of free speech working as it should. Freedom of speech was never a guarantee that our words would be received well. It simply means we can say them. The moment someone speaks, others are equally free to cheer, challenge, or ignore it entirely. That is the self-correcting balance. Throughout history, people have said things that were celebrated by some and condemned by others. The court of public opinion has always been in session. What someone says will find its audience and its critics. Both reactions are part of the same system. So when Azad speaks, let him. We are engaging with it, rejecting it, or scrolling past it. That choice belongs to each of us. The words only carry the weight we collectively decide to give them. Even the last few posts between @Mariyam @rangeelaraja and @coffee_rules elucidates the multifaceted nature of context and how we decode it individually. coffee_rules and Mariyam 1 1
coffee_rules Posted March 13 Posted March 13 1 hour ago, Throwaib_Chuckter said: Azad is azad to say what he wants. How much importance we accord to what he says is up to us as individuals, that's the beauty of free speech working as it should. Freedom of speech was never a guarantee that our words would be received well. It simply means we can say them. The moment someone speaks, others are equally free to cheer, challenge, or ignore it entirely. That is the self-correcting balance. Throughout history, people have said things that were celebrated by some and condemned by others. The court of public opinion has always been in session. What someone says will find its audience and its critics. Both reactions are part of the same system. So when Azad speaks, let him. We are engaging with it, rejecting it, or scrolling past it. That choice belongs to each of us. The words only carry the weight we collectively decide to give them. Even the last few posts between @Mariyam @rangeelaraja and @coffee_rules elucidates the multifaceted nature of context and how we decode it individually. Just like he has a right to freedom of expression, those who are criticizing him, also have the same right and feel that he should be shown his place for the opinions he expressed. The same Hutiya would have praised the Indian team if they had gone to a.dargah or church or any other place of worship as a sign of India’s celebration of secularism and bhaichara . It’s not like the 80s where secular Hindus would deride their own religion or feel ashamed to show their religious identity, there is a whole new generation that feels proud of their Hindu culture. They’re not afraid to congregate in temples, listen to kathavachaks , sing bhajans, etc. they will not be ashamed if the Indian team went to a temple with the trophy. This is a fake outrage. What should be condemned is the ICC president Jay Shah going to the temple with the team and celebrating India’s victory. He is supposed to be above all boards and not favor india. He should be criticized by all media for that. Throwaib_Chuckter 1
vvvslaxman Posted March 13 Posted March 13 6 hours ago, coffee_rules said: More heartburn for Azad and his ilk Il On a side-note, Why is Tamil in new clips so different from colonial Tamil? wow @Chaos on the right doing body guard job coffee_rules 1
coffee_rules Posted March 13 Posted March 13 4 minutes ago, vvvslaxman said: wow @Chaos on the right doing body guard job Who is the guy with the saffron veshti? Must be a local politician or goon
vvvslaxman Posted March 13 Posted March 13 4 hours ago, Lord said: 14 km non stop walk? yes. That girivalam path is about 14 km . 8.7 miles. That is not long for these guys. Nowadays even unfit guys walk 20000 steps. So this would be easy peacy for these guys. I walk 7 to 8 miles in the office at times.
vvvslaxman Posted March 13 Posted March 13 Just now, coffee_rules said: Who is the guy with the saffron veshti? Must be a local politician or goon Someone who probably is known to them from that part. or some friend. coffee_rules 1
vvvslaxman Posted March 13 Posted March 13 I should do girivalam once. May next time. We would mostly visit temples down south.
coffee_rules Posted March 13 Posted March 13 4 hours ago, Lord said: 14 km non stop walk? It’s plausible. The small Ayodhya parikrama I did last year was 15 km. There is a bigger one of 45 km which I want to do next time Lord 1
coffee_rules Posted March 13 Posted March 13 16 hours ago, jf1gp_1 said: Sanju Samson should apologizes to all Indians for doing the cross thing after WI win. It was team India which won the match. Samson insulted hindus, muslim and sikh players of thell squad. If above is acceptable then what kirti said is also acceptable. Shame on Gambhir ?
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now