FischerTal Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 dang y'all go :offtopic: on every fecking thread Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Now i realize why people start abusing posters , if some people keep on abusing ones belief without ready to acknowledge opposite exists ,i think people left with no choice. Chalo! Thanks for finally coming out in the open and justifying maa behen ki gaalis at a personal level because a particular public figure got abused. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Chalo! Thanks for finally coming out in the open and justifying maa behen ki gaalis at a personal level because a particular public figure got abused. Where did i justified abuse? i have just mentioned the reason, thats all. may be you have to read few more posts below my post to get the context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 What?Who am i to decide what topic people should debate? I am not asking people to discuss what i want , just sayng people should be consistant in discussions.All these topics are connected , you cannot just say the topics are totally independent so one can skip one issue and endlessly debate on other. Now i realize why people start abusing posters , if some people keep on abusing ones belief without ready to acknowledge opposite exists ,i think people left with no choice. Huh? Dude seriously! We are talking about freedom of choice here. Your definition of consistency is consistency of opinion. You can't equate no opinion to inconsistency IMO. Anyways, lets agree to disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Huh? Dude seriously! We are talking about freedom of choice here. Your definition of consistency is consistency of opinion. You can't equate no opinion to inconsistency IMO. Anyways' date=' lets agree to disagree.[/quote'] These are just random discussions , which is not going to change any ones so freedom of choice is bit big word to use here. Any way same freedom of choise can be interpreted as hypocracy as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Where did i justified abuse? i have just mentioned the reason, thats all. may be you have to read few more posts below my post to get the context. I am only using your logic that the number of posts you make against a topic is a barometer of your stance on it. Can you tell me how many posts you made about the abuse Modi issue and how many about the abuse Outsider issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 These are just random discussions , which is not going to change any ones so freedom of choice is bit big word to use here. Any way same freedom of choise can be interpreted as hypocracy as well. If these are indeed random discussions, then no conclusion should be made out of hypocrisy particularly when people are not posting anything on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 I am only using your logic that the number of posts you make against a topic is a barometer of your stance on it. Can you tell me how many posts you made about the abuse Modi issue and how many about the abuse Outsider issue? It's not about number of posts , its about the intent, even if you make couple of posts with good details it will be fine. What i am against is 2 posts with one liners saying oh, they are wrong while giving a detailed analysis in other case. Any way tell me where did i justified abuse? my logic is no where related to what you wrote. As for as Abuse Modi - I didnt abused any one back [you can check the deleted thread as you have autority] As for as Abuse Outsider i made atleast 2 posts condemning posters who abused you.[Any way you gave them back in same language ]. My stance is still clear you are a admin,you have more responsibilty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 If these are indeed random discussions' date=' then no conclusion should be made out of hypocrisy particularly when people are not posting anything on it.[/quote'] If people are reluctant to post even in these discussions,why should any one care about their posts . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 If people are reluctant to post even in these discussions' date='why should any one care about their posts .[/quote'] :hmmmm2: I don't get you at all. Are these discussions important or not? :dontknow: If not, there is no hypocrisy angle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 :hmmmm2: I don't get you at all. Are these discussions important or not? :dontknow: If not' date=' there is no hypocrisy angle.[/quote'] So if i said discussions are importnat,then you think hypocracy involved here? these discussions are importnat to me but now i am not sure which one is important for you & which one is not.Looks like your definition of imprtnace depends upon in which thread you can bash caertain person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 So if i said discussions are importnat,then you think hypocracy involved here? these discussions are importnat to me but now i am not sure which one is important for you & which one is not.Looks like your definition of imprtnace depends upon in which thread you can bash caertain person. Like I said I can't understand you at all! :hitler: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 Like I said I can't understand you at all! :hitler: Good atleast it saves some time for both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FischerTal Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 here is a chocolate bar for both of you. ab bandh karo :wall: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crookbond Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 ^ Thanks for the reminder. #NowEating Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Outsider Posted July 1, 2013 Share Posted July 1, 2013 When a country release terrorists ' date=' it is an assumption that they will kill people in future.[b']What if the country tightens security and gun down those terrorists later.But hostages were sureshot to be killed.. So what is good option releasing terrorists and tighten security or letting all hostages killed.No sensible country can allow its citizens to be killed because of assumption The plane was in Indian territory for a long time and coolly took off from here. Even when the plane was in Kandahar, it is Afghanistan not some country with any significant military. If you are talking about other countries, then other countries would have stormed the plane - a few civilian lives would have been lost, but many more would have been saved. Regarding the bold bit what steps did the BJP government take to gun them down at a later date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger80 Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 The plane was in Indian territory for a long time and coolly took off from here. Even when the plane was in Kandahar, it is Afghanistan not some country with any significant military. If you are talking about other countries, then other countries would have stormed the plane - a few civilian lives would have been lost, but many more would have been saved. Regarding the bold bit what steps did the BJP government take to gun them down at a later date? I am not saying that BJP handled situation very well . Yes it was mistake to allow it to take off from Indian airspace .But after it was landed in Kandahar the commando action was not at possible .Pakistan or China owuld have never allowed India to use their airspace for military action I have read most of world hijacking cases on wiki and nowhere I read that military action was taken without the consent of country where plane was landed http://www.slideshare.net/bjpuploader/kandahar-hijacking-congress-lies-exposed?type=presentation No govt whether it was BJP or congress should be crticised when they take action to save lives of innocent people. at present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 2, 2013 Share Posted July 2, 2013 In a new twist in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case, an affidavit accessed by CNN-IBN and Cobra post reveals that Jammu and Kashmir Police had informed Gujarat Police that they had arrested three terrorists who allegedly had teamed up with Amjad Ali, who was killed in an encounter along with Ishrat, to assassinate Chief Minister Narendra Modi in 2004. The affidavit was filed by ACP Parixita Rathod, investigating officer in the Ishrat Jehan encounter case, before the POTA court in Gujarat. Rathod had stated that Jammu and Kashmir Police had informed the Gujarat Police of arresting three terrorists in 2004 in Srinagar, allegedly involved in a plot to kill Modi. The affidavit further said that Gujarat police officer ACP Dr NK Amin, already under arrest in the Ishrat case, even interrogated the terrorists in Srinagar jail According to the affidavit, the terrorists admitted that they had teamed up with Amjad Ali, who was killed by Gujarat police along with Ishrat Jehan in an encounter on June 15, 2004. The Jammu and Kashmir Police refused to hand over the terrorists to Gujarat Police despite the state getting transfer orders from the POTA court in Gujarat, the affidavit added http://ibnlive.in.com/news/aides-of-man-killed-with-ishrat-jahan-had-planned-to-kill-modi-report/403539-37-64.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulbul Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 AHMEDABAD: Ishrat Jahan was not a terrorist, but the three others killed along with her in a fake encounter on the outskirts of Ahmedabad nine years ago had alleged terror links, the CBI has concluded in its chargesheet to be filed in the case before the Gujarat high court on Wednesday. The CBI has said the three - Pranesh Pillai alias Javed Shaikh, Amjad Ali Rana and Zeeshan Johar - were allegedly planning attacks in Ahmedabad. It added Pranesh was using Ishrat, a Mumbai college student, as a shield to escape detection. The four were killed in cold blood "The three men were in touch with a Pakistan-based Lashkar-e-Taiba handler, Muzammil. The three were identified as terror suspects by the Subsidiary Intelligence Bureau during telephone interceptions. They were planning to unleash terror attacks in Ahmedabad, but Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi was not their target," said a CBI official. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Ishrat-was-not-a-terrorist-CBI-chargesheet/articleshow/20886401.cms What is the deal between a innocent girl and 3 terrorists :hmmm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KhanSaab Posted July 3, 2013 Share Posted July 3, 2013 Guilty by association. Fool proof justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts