UPDATE Delhi Explosion in Mosque
Meerut on Fire, Karachi Burns

#173, Majumadar Bhai,
LOL - thanks for clearing up the ``Punjoo`` word not being insulting.

Salimbhai,

What is offensive about the word Punjoo - in India we often refer to each others and ourselves as Punjus, Harrys (Biharis), Bongs, Gults (from AP), Maddus (Tamil), Gujjus, Malloos (Keralite) etc. in our daily lives and rarely have I seen anyone take offence at that.

(Furthermore, you could suggest settling the Biharis in Mr. Tahmed32`s living room. )

I am sure Tahmed sahib will permit all his friends and family, irrespective of ethnic background (and no one else) to settle in his living room.

Regards

Re: # 164wiseguyin
>>>>>India, England, France, Thailand, Australia and some places in
Nordic countries. Guess what is common in all these places<<<

Nice point. What else, religion of peace. (Peace Be Upon Them!).

Watching the Paris riots on TV, the thought crossed my mind that
India`s situation is probably more secure than that of a western democracy,
a permanent member of security council.

majumdar #165, {``Plus I dont understand why the Biharis have to be settled in Karachi, they could be easily settled in Punjab, ``}

Majumdar Bhai,
Furthermore, you could suggest settling the Biharis in Mr. Tahmed32`s living room. Let`s be serious and not try to evade the issue by getting into irrational and illogical prerequisites - the issue is not where, but when. My friend, this travesty has been going on since 1971 - almost 35 years. Is there no shame in Pakistan? Indians, on the other hand, have been reaching out to ethnic Indians in Fiji, in Africa, in the West Indies, and NRIs all over the world. Then, people complain about why some Pakis think that India is better than Pakistan.

In India they say, ``Na nau man tel milega, na Radha nachegi.`` :)

Tahmed32 #161, and 162 {``Mr. Salim - the question of the ``stranded Pakistanis`` is a political issue , and by not considering them to have any case to being allowed into Pakistan does not make mean that I am slandering or ridiculing biharis.

On the other hand, your slanders and insults about non-muhajir pakistanis - towards us ``panjoos`` as you call us, or your put-down of Ahmedzai`s pathan background - are just that, i.e. ethnic slanders . There is no political issue that you are dealing with.

Mr. Salim: and i may add to #161 that using strong language (i.e. by calling me a hypocrite) is not a substitute for poor logic (i.e. equating views on political issues with ethnic slanders). ``}


Mr. Tahmed Sahib,
If you call the return of ``stranded`` Pakis a political issue, then please have the decency and logic to consider the Punjabi hegemony a political issue also. The word ``Punjoo`` is not of my creation, I believe I learned to use this abbreviation from Mr. Stuka, who happens to be a Punjabi himself. :) Mr. Ahmedzai is right - many Mohajirs use the word ``Punjaibi`` when they mean to be insulting.

Mr. Ahmedzai speculated over my wife being an Alawite and questioned my ethnic and national credentials (whether I am Indian or not). I think that by dismissing his nasty remarks with some ethnic humor about the use of niswar, my comments were not so bad, considering things within context.

As for your being a hypocrite, sir, I just have to reiterate your own words that you posted earlier - the ethnic slurs and obviously racist attitude is manifested in bold. :)

You had said:
{`` I used to be sympathetic to these biharis, but no more given the politics of ethnic hatred that their fellow biharis brought with them to Pakistan (similar to what, as discussed above, you have displayed). And contrary to your views, these biharis have no more ``right`` to come to Pakistan than the mexicans (who wrap themselves in the US flag, like the biharis wrap themselves in the Pakistan flag) have a ``right`` to come to the US. ``}

#165, majumdar {``I am sorry to see you linking the tragic earthquake to the fate of Biharis, were the poor Pakis who died in NWFP and POK responsible for what happened in B`desh.
Plus I dont understand why the Biharis have to be settled in Karachi, they could be easily settled in Punjab.``}

Majumdar Bhai,
First of all, I apologize for the insensitive remark that I made in anger linking Mr. Tahmed`s utter disdain for ``stranded Pakistanis`` with the so-called ``divine retribution`` that I associated with the recent earthquakes. I am truly sorry, because I really don`t think in that manner. However, Mr. Tahmed has made such a big deal (and correctly so) about the suffering of these earthquake victims. Then, displaying his true colors as a hypocrite and a part-time muslim mullah, he goes on to state that these ``biharis,`` as he calls the ``stranded`` Pakis in BD, don`t ``deserve`` to come to Pakistan. Furthermore, he extends his bigotry and racism toward the Mexicans in the US. I just wanted to give him a taste of his own snake oil and had no intention to hurt the feelings of earthquake victims or survivors. The man is a hypocrite and a fake and I have lost respect for him because of his callous animosity against these poor innocent victims of Paki stinginess.

Now, why would you want to settle the ``stranded`` Pakis from BD in Punjab? Judging from Mr. Tahmed`s racist jingoism, if he represents the views of a sizable portion of Punjab`s population, we would be just adding to these refugees` problems. Heck, if people in Punjab can`t tolerate their own Punjabi Ahmed ``brethren,`` who eat, speak, and live pretty much as the other Punjabis do, why would they welcome totally different people? Nowadays, being Muslim doesn`t count for much, except that being Ahmedi is worse in Pakistan. I say let the ``stranded`` Pakis from BD settle wherever they feel more comfortable and accepted.
Also, let me remind you, that by not letting these ``stranded`` Pakis come to Pakistan, you are sending a very sinister message to the approximately 15 million Mohajirs in Pakistan. You are telling them that the Government of Pakistan and the majority Punjabi population do not want to add to the number of Mohajirs in Pakistan. The message is ``we don`t like Mohajirs and we certainly don`t want to add to their numbers.`` Now, is that any way to instill loyalty and patriotism to otherwise nationalist Pakis? Think about it, gentlemen.

Re: # 163

Reminds me of the ``Smog`` episode in ``South park``.... Closet Mullah 32 just loves the smell of his own f@r!t..... :))

Tahmed32
I don`t think naming interactors of Pakistani origin who like to come on this site to air their views on Indian miseries is going to solve our basic problem. If I did that would lead to another spate of posts. Suffice to say that there are Pakistanis who derive some enjoyment from poking fun at Indian ideas, religions, people etc. Whether they are single issue or not is not the point. There are a sufficient number of posts.

My problem is I never quite understand the raison d`etre behind these things. It seems to me it`s mostly to act as a catalyst to arguments that are already heated.

I do not agree with Arjun_m. I do not agree with HP, Behram1, Faisaluno on many topics either. However Arjun i s not happy with the killing of innocent Muslims in Gujarat, and Behram1 was not happy with the bomb blasts at Varanasi.
I do hope India and Pakistan can live in peace someday. There is much more to gain in such a arrangement.

So I`ll say the pot and kettle are both grey. And perhaps a little detergent over all of us would help.

I hope I shall never crow over the deaths of innocent folks anywhere, or worse still say that they were punished by an (un)just God.

Now I must really read Mr Khan`s analysis of the Napoleonic wars. So I`m off. Good day.

majmudar sahib#165 I think you make excellent points both in the part addressed to Mr. Salim and the part addressed to me. I had missed Mr. Salim`s references to the earthquake tragedy as retribution for the evil Pakistanis not allowing biharis (sorry, ``stranded pakistanis``) to migrate to Pakistan, and I would probably not have brought it to his attention as gently as you did.

With respect to the part addressed to me, I agree that there is a long history of animosity between india and pakistan and so the entire onus cannot be placed on BJP (or indeed one country) alone. There are however a number of factors based on which I think this animosity will dissipate over time:

1. Political moves towards peace - We are all influenced to greater or lesser degrees by the state of india-pakistan relations, rather than trying to use our own brains. This is a common weakness, reflected in the following lines from W.H. Auden notes in ``The Unknown Citizen``:
Our researchers into Public Opinion are content
That he held the proper opinions for he time of year;
When there was peace, he was for peace; when there was war, he went.

So, when there is peace among the leaders, the followers will in due course change their tune as well.

2. Economic trends - money talks. the emerging global economy calls for greater interdependence rather than competition of the industrial age.

3. Social trends - there is increasing literacy and greater contact with the US where independence of individual thought is highly valued. This is bound to have more thinking people and fewer unthinking goats who find security in the ``herd mentality`` in the subcontinent.

The above is my thesis, at least. :-)

Re: 155

Salimbhai

(Pakistan was too mean-spirited to accept 250,000 Pakistanis, so an earthquake took away 70,000 innocent Pakistanis. Next time that earthquake needs to demolish Islamabad - the root of all evil. )

I am sorry to see you linking the tragic earthquake to the fate of Biharis, were the poor Pakis who died in NWFP and POK responsible for what happened in B`desh.

Plus I dont understand why the Biharis have to be settled in Karachi, they could be easily settled in Punjab, it has space and being a faster growing economy a greater need for additional manpower. Besides, Punjab has a population of 80 million plus, so a quarter million Biharis would hardly tip the demographic balance.

Tahmed sahib

(and perhaps this animosity will dissipate once a new generation is brought up in India that was clearly not raised on this hate-Pakistan ideology of BJP. )

I am also for peace b/w India and Pak. But I think the animosity is far too deep rooted and cannot be blamed on BJP alone. BJP was nowhere in the picture in the 1965, 1971 wars or when Zia started cross-border terrorism in Punjab.

Regards

Re: # 138
Discovery has discovered the following:
>How many hindus has killed (suicide bomb) their fellow hindus or in INDIAs case, how
> many hindus has targeted other religion in the name of RAM??? Well the answer is many
> but i want to hear from you.

sir ji - hamen bhi batayen.... I m not aware of any cases recorded of ``Hindu`` suicide
bombers. [The one thing that I like bout chowk is the sheer amount of things I found about
Islam, its prophets and the general way pukis think... ]
Coming back to the point you raised -I am only aware of the LTTE that gave some kind of
organisational support to suicide bombings - but even these are now fallen in disuse. Also,
LTTE does not have any record of religion inspired attacks (If it helps you - there are
christians in LTTE !).
As for the killings in the name of the Prince of Ayodhya, are you referring to the riots that
happen periodically ? It is useless to go any further because your viewpoint is not going
to change. Still - if it helps you, think about this. There have been riots now in many
places of the free world; India, England, France, Thailand, Australia and some places in
Nordic countries. Guess what is common in all these places.

#160 by tahmed32 on April 18, 2006 4:20pm PT


the spite and hatred that is demonstrated towards Pakistan by too many Indians on chowk and which is clearly one-sided.


prophet tahmed(peace be unto your self-righteous rear)...I bet you love the smell of your own farts....

#156 Mr. Salim: and i may add to #161 that using strong language (i.e. by calling me a hypocrite) is not a substitute for poor logic (i.e. equating views on political issues with ethnic slanders).

#156 Mr. Salim - the question of the ``stranded Pakistanis`` is a political issue , and by not considering them to have any case to being allowed into Pakistan does not make mean that I am slandering or ridiculing biharis.

On the other hand, your slanders and insults about non-muhajir pakistanis - towards us ``panjoos`` as you call us, or your put-down of Ahmedzai`s pathan background - are just that, i.e. ethnic slanders . There is no political issue that you are dealing with.

I think you are an intelligent person and can tell the difference between the two.

#157 swarrier: Your point about ignoring such posters is of course reasonable. However, it is also not unreasonable to point out -as I did below and in the past on chowk - the spite and hatred that is demonstrated towards Pakistan by too many Indians on chowk and which is clearly one-sided. And I dont say this with any joy, since I consider good relations between the two countries to be significant to the well-being and prosperity of Pakistan - and perhaps this animosity will dissipate once a new generation is brought up in India that was clearly not raised on this hate-Pakistan ideology of BJP.

#157 swarrier: I wrote some very specific things in my response to you. Please address those rather than making sweeping generalizations to seek parity in these single-minded obsessions when there is none: chowk provides ample indication that Pakistanis on chowk are far less concerned about India than vice versa. Arjun #158 has even was good enough to illustrate my point with another one of his standard cut and pastes. :-)