coffee_rules Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Arre Autowaale Baba aap wehan Hindustan mein yeh sab dekh rahe hain? I mean Manmohan Singh ka swearing in ceremony bhi dekha tha kya?? These days India seems to get all its news, and movies, from USA it seems :nervous: I know of one desi living in Dubai flying to USA for the Inauguration. Watching it on streaming video door ki baat hain. As for me, I don't even want to watch it on TV. Ar work, it is a big event with everybody going to the Auditorium to watch it. I guess for blacks/whites in America, it is historic. But, for others it is just another day in their lives with costs of commodities to worry about. The news is flashed in every major newspaper of the world, not just Indian.
flamy Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 I didnt even know abt inaugration and shimit. I gave a blank stare when my dad was asking me abt it. I'm hopelessly in the well. (n-well not p-well)
Holysmoke Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 good but if you are choosing not to where tradition is to do then you are basically denigrading that religion it goes beyond atheism .. true athiest wud not even care and take ti as a harmless custom and yes those who have point scoring to do they certainly will indulge in these antics No mate. If I'm an atheist, I dont believe in religion. Even if the tradition is to do, if I dont believe in it, I have all the rights not to. True atheist would not be pressurized into doing something that attaches him to a religion when he clearly does not believe in it. You are confusing an atheist with an agnostic.
flamy Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 ^ An agnostic is a confused git right? He believes in a Higher Power but not God as such... I think I'm an agnostic :X
Ram Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 So lets get this straight, If America screws it up and has its President take oath on a particular religion's sacred book, we should also do that? Only the saffronwaadis can come up with such outstanding logic.. And what legendary manipulation does it take, to introduce the usual BS secular/P-sec/Hindu argument, even in an event as unrelated as the inaguration of the President of the United States.
fineleg Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 So lets get this straight' date=' [b']If America screws it up and has its President take oath on a particular religion's sacred book, we should also do that? Only the saffronwaadis can come up with such outstanding logic.. And what legendary manipulation does it take, to introduce the usual BS secular/P-sec/Hindu argument, even in an event as unrelated as the inaguration of the President of the United States. :haha: Legendary manipulation has become de facto by Brigade!
The Outsider Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Just when I think the Bhagwa brigade has reached the limits of lunacy, they push the limits further. Bhaiyya, Obama is a Christian and has been attending church for decades, why should he have a problem taking his oath on the Bible? Having said that, there was some mayor or someone a few years back who chose to take his oath on the Quran and was allowed to do so. Aur agar Amreeka kuen mein kood bhi raha hai, to hum bhi kood jaaaen?
gs Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Trying to catch-up through Cee Enn Enn streaming link http://www.cnn.com/video/fb/facebook.html?stream=stream1 A lot of things our Neta babus need to learn, though India, much before Amreeka, already had a woman PM, minority President and PM etc. However, we Indians hardly get our deserved hype and accolade for our stellar credential in democracy which even Amreeka is still trying to catch-up. Important thing which often gets missed is -- Obama travelled to a prayer -- which news anchor called as "custom". I know USA is a secular country, but still they hold their Christian values and prayer etc. closer to them and every Prez abides by that. Obama is also suppose to take oath on a BIBLE. Contrast to this I remember self-loathing Kaangressi leadres -- P. Chidambaram actually refused to take oath on BhagwadGita instead asked for Indian constitution. Indians strangely feel proud and morally high after ridiculing and abondoning their own culture. Only some of the NE states and California are secular to some extent. The south is hardcore - theory of evolution denying - bible belt!! Let there be no doubt about that. Its a Christian nation first, Jewish next and everything else comes last. I have not once seen a mosque prayer blasted out on loud speakers 5 times a day as it is done in India. Just pondering if this makes US less (p)secular than India?!?
Lurker Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Only some of the NE states and California are secular to some extent. The south is hardcore - theory of evolution denying - bible belt!! Let there be no doubt about that. Its a Christian nation first' date=' Jewish next and everything else comes last. I have not once seen a mosque prayer blasted out on loud speakers 5 times a day as it is done in India. [b']Just pondering if this makes US less (p)secular than India?!? You are asking the wrong person that question. To him every other country is less (p)secular than India. :winky:
Ram Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 And why would P.Chidabaram not want to take the oath on the constitution? He was swearing in as a govt. minister of the Republic of India and not as a custodian of the Shankaracharya's Kanchi Kamakodi mutt. His job is to uphold the ideals and the principles of the constitution, not the tenets of Hinduism. No wonder then, that he insisted for a copy of the constitution. As always, the saffron's brigade's world view is so jaundiced by the Hindutva glasses that they wear, that they cannot even see basic logic. Only, imagine what their outcry would be if a Muslim Minister insisted on taking the oath on a Q'uran? There will be foul cries of 'Oh, he's putting religion over country, he's unpatriotic'... Damn, now that I think of it, I shouldnt have mentioned the last part because at some point in the future, a Muslim minister may do that and these guys will duly paint the board saffron and then I could have bumped this thread and made them look real smart.. :haha:
Ram Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Its not just what they take oath on ... its the track record. our leaders have not indulged in ethnic cleansing ' date= seperatism , demanding Sharia type laws refusing to sing Vande Mataram and such serious acts. This is the main reason why the Muslim community as a whole attracts ire.considering how the self styled generals of Secularism operate he would have gotten hounded for something as silly as tipping a waitress .... forget riots ... Who gives a **** about facts ... :haha: BTW more people died in the Delhi riots, there was emergency for about 2 yrs under IG and there was someone like Sanjay Gandhi (and now Mata Rome) ..... yet the Gandhi family and its Kaangress party is sickular wonly .... :winky: By your own admission, more people were killed in riots under the Cong regime than the corresponding number during Gujrat 2002. So, all of a sudden all those Cong leaders who orchestrated the Sikh massacre( and mind you, I am going strictly your own words :D) were all Muslims? Now, I may not be that fluent in religious names, but whichever you cut it, the name ‘Jagdish Tytler’ does not sound Muslim to me, nor does the name 'Sajjan Kumar'…:haha:...Unless of course you're saying the massacre of Sikhs does not come under 'ethnic cleansing'...:haha: Nor does the name Indira Gandhi or Sanjay Gandhi does… After all, they imposed emergency for two years and committed heinous crimes right? Another classic case of a Saffron Brigade member going head over heels to bash a community, not even contemplating if what they type is self contradictory.. :cantstop: Besides, the whole point of this thread( or atleast how it developed) isn’t about who killed whom anyway. It was about P.Chidambaram insisting on taking the oath on a copy of the Indian constitution, which he was 100% right to do. But one of your own fails to see such simple logic and converts it into the usual ‘Psec’ issue and as your group’s policy, none of you guys take the time to point out the absolute fallacy of that argument.:cantstop: Oh really. Here's your post from less than 24 hours ago;
Macj Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Obama bungled up the Oath.... doofus. I think Obama will do reasonably well internationally but i think domestically he will fail. All in all the guy is a populist who has galvanized people into believing what can be, of course many will love fantasy and join that belief. Charisma will not last long in battle, its leadership and ability to instill fearlessness that does. Bush might be a Class 1 moron in the eyes of many, but a little known fact is the military just adores the guy. Make one thing certain Barack Hussein Obama is no Lincoln.
Ram Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 When did Gandhi family / Congress claim to be working based on Hindu religious beliefs ? The acts that I mentioned were based on religious edicts if it wasnt clear to you. Going by your logic LTTE is Hindu terrorist org. Err no, but what matters they were going by their hatred against the Sikh community. So by your logic, its O.K to kill 1000s of people as long as you don’t base it on some religious ideology? Mind you, I haven’t even gone on to the territory of what happened in Gujrat and what distinguished men like Praveen Togadia were doing giving their hate-filled, rhetoric driven speeches against the Muslim community. So, now whats your argument? Praveen Togadia is not a member of a Hindu organization and is the head of boy scouts? :cantstop: P.S: As always, the brigade member is evasive on the real question posed, on that of the gita and the constituition. No surprises there.
cowboysfan Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 i dont get some of the posters here.is this what hinduism teaches you-hatred and derision for other religions?.let me understand your logic-other religons are bigoted and bad so lets be more like them-is that it?
Lurker Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 i dont get some of the posters here.is this what hinduism teaches you-hatred and derision for other religions?.let me understand your logic-other religons are bigoted and bad so lets be more like them-is that it? Not sure about that. However thats one heck of a beautiful family in your avtar. Who are they?
cowboysfan Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Obama bungled up the Oath.... doofus. I think Obama will do reasonably well internationally but i think domestically he will fail. All in all the guy is a populist who has galvanized people into believing what can be, of course many will love fantasy and join that belief. Charisma will not last long in battle, its leadership and ability to instill fearlessness that does. Bush might be a Class 1 moron in the eyes of many, but a little known fact is the military just adores the guy. Make one thing certain Barack Hussein Obama is no Lincoln. the doofus is the chief justice.he had 2 WHOLE sentences to memorize and he flubbed it up.Obama was clearly flummoxed by this change of words.get your facts straight before criticizing-this is something american republicans do.
Guest dada_rocks Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 i dont get some of the posters here.is this what hinduism teaches you-hatred and derision for other religions?.let me understand your logic-other religons are bigoted and bad so lets be more like them-is that it? These days saying hinduims is lliberal and has always been like that offends fundamentalists of other hues including secualr.. This makes their job of royal eyewash viz a viz jihadi and other hue of extremism difficult.. bolo to ye bhi bolana chhod dun.. sala gazaba chutiapa hai kisis ki shakala gandi hai aur uska bura na lage is liye achchhi shakal walon ka naak kata ja raha hai taki sab ak jaise lagen..:--D
Macj Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 the doofus is the chief justice.he had 2 WHOLE sentences to memorize and he flubbed it up.Obama was clearly flummoxed by this change of words.get your facts straight before criticizing-this is something american republicans do. Roberts quoted the whole text..... Obama stopped at 'I ....as president will execute...' why? Because he forgot the next set of words.
cowboysfan Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Not sure about that. However thats one heck of a beautiful family in your avtar. Who are they? hehe-its a show on HBO called "big love" about a polygamous family in utah-very fascinating imo.
Guest dada_rocks Posted January 20, 2009 Posted January 20, 2009 Err no, but what matters they were going by their hatred against the Sikh community. So by your logic, its O.K to kill 1000s of people as long as you don’t base it on some religious ideology? Mind you, I haven’t even gone on to the territory of what happened in Gujrat and what distinguished men like Praveen Togadia were doing giving their hate-filled, rhetoric driven speeches against the Muslim community. So, now whats your argument? Praveen Togadia is not a member of a Hindu organization and is the head of boy scouts? :cantstop: P.S: As always, the brigade member is evasive on the real question posed, on that of the gita and the constituition. No surprises there. People have stopped taking your nonsense seriously...... First get a history book and read before vomitting nonsense....
Recommended Posts