Inappropriate Language...

[Joe Shearer]

Want to make an elephant out of a fly?

Invite some hyper-sensitive Indians to the discussion/suggestion. You'll find out, everything that you have been doing in your life was wrong! Trouble fully programmed!

I suggest an official warning to anyone displaying distorted maps where Kashmir is shown as part of India;
Or any Indian laying claims to our heritage (such as Ghandhara and IVC);
Or glorifying Indian sponsored terrorism in the region (such as Mukti Bahini, LTTE, BLA, TTP).

This is pure profanity!


PS: To be politically correct: I said "some hyper-sensitive", now lets see how does that one go...

To be correct, O purely profaned one, it is Gandhara, not Ghandhara. If you even knew anything about what you falsely claim as your heritage.

 

[Levina]

Do you realise that keeping to a straight and narrow path, treading the razor's edge, is not an easy thing?

Ofcourse!

Or perhaps you believe that this is a fruit of sycophancy?

Lol
I dont remember calling you a sycophant but I do believe that your threshold for accepting criticism from Indians is pretty low.
BUT this can be discussed in detail on a more appropriate thread as i do not want to deviate from the topic.

Remember when I tried to persuade them (Pakistani members, led by @RAMPAGE ) to petition the Government of India to strive for peace, and wrote a memorial faithfully shadowing their thoughts?

Oh ! I do. But it wasnt merely limited to striving for peace. In your attempt to convince both sides, you offended Indians.
Sorry to say, that I find it very hard to gulp down the word with which you described Wani. I am a piddly human being and find it hard to stretch my thoughts to the higher plane like you do.

You should remember, you were part of those cheering the attack.

Cheering the attack?
I tried explaining it to you where you failed on that thread, but failed miserably. This is NOT the place to discuss it.

My previous post on this thread >>>

Had this issue been raised by you I don't think our dear mod would have vehemently opposed it the way he did when it was raised by a "fool" called moi.
Lol

was not about you but the mod.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Ofcourse!


Lol
I dont remember calling you a sycophant but I do believe that your threshold for accepting criticism from Indians is pretty low.
BUT this can be discussed in detail on a more appropriate thread as i do not want to deviate from the topic.


Oh ! I do. But it wasnt merely limited to striving for peace. In your attempt to convince both sides, you offended Indians.
Sorry to say, that I find it very hard to gulp down the word with which you described Wani. I am a piddly human being and find it hard to stretch my thoughts to the higher plane like you do.

Cheering the attack?
I tried explaining it to you where you failed on that thread, but failed miserably. This is NOT the place to discuss it.

My previous post on this thread >>>


was not about you but the mod.

This is where I feel defeated. I explained carefully, patiently, making allowances for the thickening that affects a certain kind of mentality (not yours, the person who led the Loyal Opposition), that it was my impression of the nearest acceptable term that might be acceptable to Pakistanis. It was not my word to describe Wani, it was my effort to find a word that they would use to describe Wani. As far as I am concerned, a terrorist was shot down, his elimination was handled badly, with excessive publicity where just silence would have been better, and my thinking about that was very clear. My thinking about the wording of a petition by the Pakistani members interested was also very clear; two drafts were run by them, and changes incorporated.

A classic case of shooting the messenger, in this case, the draftsman.

And then you complain that my threshold for accepting criticism from Indians is pretty low.

Wow.

 

[Levina]

This is where I feel defeated. I explained carefully, patiently, making allowances for the thickening that affects a certain kind of mentality (not yours, the person who led the Loyal Opposition), that it was my impression of the nearest acceptable term that might be acceptable to Pakistanis. It was not my word to describe Wani, it was my effort to find a word that they would use to describe Wani. As far as I am concerned, a terrorist was shot down, his elimination was handled badly, with excessive publicity where just silence would have been better, and my thinking about that was very clear. My thinking about the wording of a petition by the Pakistani members interested was also very clear; two drafts were run by them, and changes incorporated.

A classic case of shooting the messenger, in this case, the draftsman.

And then you complain that my threshold for accepting criticism from Indians is pretty low.

Wow.

I'm NOT discussing this here Joe.

Just a humble reminder that me and you are here to object to the usuage of the word BHARATI on the forum, in an offensive manner.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I'm NOT discussing this here Joe.

Just a humble reminder that me and you are here to object to the usuage of the word BHARATI on the forum, in an offensive manner.

Roger.

Over and out.

 

[coffee_cup]

To be correct, O purely profaned one, it is Gandhara, not Ghandhara.

Ok sir, please do not execute me for making a presumed typo.

First of all, English is not my first language, I learnt it as a foreign language and am bound to make mistakes. Secondly, not being a pure English word, you will find several spelling variations of "Ghandhara" or "Gandhara" .

I know however how it is written in my native language Urdu.

If you even knew anything about what you falsely claim as your heritage.

Now you are offending me, my Bharti friend.

 

[Sher-e-India]

Ok sir, please do not execute me for making a presumed typo.

First of all, English is not my first language, I learnt it as a foreign language and am bound to make mistakes. Secondly, not being a pure English word, you will find several spelling variations of "Ghandhara" or "Gandhara" .

I know however how it is written in my native language Urdu.



Now you are offending me, my Bharti friend.

You can tell Joe Sir that "ge" sound in Urdu is not present instead we have "ghoin" hence the usage in Roman Urdu. Btw, I don't find "Bharti" offensive its standard khari boli in Haryana lol

 

[Joe Shearer]

Ok sir, please do not execute me for making a presumed typo.

First of all, English is not my first language, I learnt it as a foreign language and am bound to make mistakes. Secondly, not being a pure English word, you will find several spelling variations of "Ghandhara" or "Gandhara" .

I know however how it is written in my native language Urdu.



Now you are offending me, my Bharti friend.

Let's get down and dirty: enough originating from your side, so learn to take it.

Gandhara is not an English word at all, it is a Sanskrit word. In Sanskrit, 'G' and 'Gh' are distinct sounds, and cannot be confused. Converting from the Sanskrit to the English can by no stretch of the imagination yield a Ghandhara. In brief, unless you use diacritical marks, you cannot land up with spelling variations of Gandhara.

As for the sting in the tail, it had its desired effect. Mogambo khush huwa.

Let's get down and dirty: enough originating from your side, so learn to take it.

Gandhara is not an English word at all, it is a Sanskrit word. In Sanskrit, 'G' and 'Gh' are distinct sounds, and cannot be confused. Converting from the Sanskrit to the English can by no stretch of the imagination yield a Ghandhara. In brief, unless you use diacritical marks, you cannot land up with spelling variations of Gandhara.

As for the sting in the tail, it had its desired effect. Mogambo khush huwa.

Afterwords, in other words, a post-script: @Sher-e-India is precisely correct. Your troubles originate when you take a word coined in a different language to your current vernacular, and then try to translate/transliterate it into English.

Does it put into a nutshell, my dear @coffee_cup , what I wanted to say through my superficially offensive remark? It was superficially offensive because although I wrote it to be offensive and in my irritation at your stand on the word 'bharti', there is a great deal of meat to it. It depends on whether you concentrate on the meat of it or on the offence.

 

[coffee_cup]

Let's get down and dirty: enough originating from your side, so learn to take it.

Gandhara is not an English word at all, it is a Sanskrit word. In Sanskrit, 'G' and 'Gh' are distinct sounds, and cannot be confused. Converting from the Sanskrit to the English can by no stretch of the imagination yield a Ghandhara. In brief, unless you use diacritical marks, you cannot land up with spelling variations of Gandhara.

As for the sting in the tail, it had its desired effect. Mogambo khush huwa.

And?

Urdu language is known for containing words from several other languages, just like English or any other modern language for that matter. My forefathers spoke Sanskrit, and some other primitive language before that. With generations we evolved, learnt and adopted other languages, big deal? Are you speaking the original language that first people from Bengal/Mumbai (or where ever you live) spoke?

I can write Gandhara or Ghandhara, Harrapa or Harappa, Mohanjo Daro or Mohanjjo Daro, Muhammed, Mohammad none is correct or incorrect per se, since adopted from another language. In some cases, even in original languages you will find slight variations going from one region to the other.

Making deliberate distortion of facts on the basis of this paper-thin argument? I had expected better from you, Joe.

Does it put into a nutshell, my dear @coffee_cup , what I wanted to say through my superficially offensive remark? It was superficially offensive because although I wrote it to be offensive and in my irritation at your stand on the word 'bharti', there is a great deal of meat to it. It depends on whether you concentrate on the meat of it or on the offence.

Distortion of history is extremely offensive. The party you are trying to offend by this distortion can laugh it out for it being completely silly, if coming from some "average Joe", or can take real offense if the person making it is a proclaimed "academic Joe".

Tell Egyptians that their claim to Egyptian civilization is false and "Indians" are the rightful inheritors. The reaction could be a roaring laugther or an angry protest, depending who says it.

PS: If you continue this "blasphemy", this distortion of history. I'll just ignore it, considering it some non-serious outbursts of profanity, not to bother about.

 

[Joe Shearer]

And?

Urdu language is known for containing words from several other languages, just like English or any other modern language for that matter. My forefathers spoke Sanskrit, and some other primitive language before that. With generations we evolved, learnt and adopted other languages, big deal? Are you speaking the original language that first people from Bengal/Mumbai (or where ever you live) spoke?

I can write Gandhara or Ghandhara, Harrapa or Harappa, Mohanjo Daro or Mohanjjo Daro, Muhammed, Mohammad none is correct or incorrect per se, since adopted from another language. In some cases, even in original languages you will find slight variations going from one region to the other.

Making deliberate distortion of facts on the basis of this paper-thin argument? I had expected better from you, Joe.

That was evasive, not substantive. It wasn't the grammar that I pointed out to you, it was the alphabet, the letters. The word remains what it was; it might, as a living place, have acquired other names. In fact, it has. But when you are referring to the original, you cannot shelter behind the contention that contemporary orthography, in contemporary script, does not allow the original or demands a change.

Distortion of history is extremely offensive. The party you are trying to offend by this distortion can laugh it out for it being completely silly, if coming from some "average Joe", or can take real offense if the person making it is a proclaimed "academic Joe".

Tell Egyptians that their claim to Egyptian civilization is false and "Indians" are the rightful inheritors. The reaction could be a roaring laugther or an angry protest, depending who says it.

I wouldn't tell Egyptians that. I would say so only if I had a case to put. I do. When you are in the right frame of mind, and not traducing Indians calling them bharti, I will explain.

Your second sentence read very ironic, on this thread. Very ironic. How strange that you savagely attack a principle in one place, then, in the same thread, draw yourself up to your full height and defend it.

I read and spoke Gurkhali from the age of 7. I studied in Bengali till Class VIII. Subsequently I learnt some other languages. One little couplet I remember from one of those languages is one that you might find useful to imbibe and to follow:

O what a tangled web we weave
When first we set out to deceive.

 

[Grevion]

That was evasive, not substantive. It wasn't the grammar that I pointed out to you, it was the alphabet, the letters. The word remains what it was; it might, as a living place, have acquired other names. In fact, it has. But when you are referring to the original, you cannot shelter behind the contention that contemporary orthography, in contemporary script, does not allow the original or demands a change.



I wouldn't tell Egyptians that. I would say so only if I had a case to put. I do. When you are in the right frame of mind, and not traducing Indians calling them bharti, I will explain.

Your second sentence read very ironic, on this thread. Very ironic. How strange that you savagely attack a principle in one place, then, in the same thread, draw yourself up to your full height and defend it.

I read and spoke Gurkhali from the age of 7. I studied in Bengali till Class VIII. Subsequently I learnt some other languages. One little couplet I remember from one of those languages is one that you might find useful to imbibe and to follow:

O what a tangled web we weave
When first we set out to deceive.

Hey joe! the VC of the NALSAR university of law was on the NDTV(Hindi) primetime with Rawish Kumar last night. They had a very meaningful discussion on the uniform and common civil laws in India. Did you missed that show??

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hey joe! the VC of the NALSAR university of law was on the NDTV(Hindi) primetime with Rawish Kumar last night. They had a very meaningful discussion on the uniform and common civil laws in India. Did you missed that show??

I don't watch TV.

I used to be a fan of Faizan Mustafa, until I joined NALSAR. No longer.

What was the programme like? It must have been on the Uniform Civil Code. Faizan has been soft pedalling things this whole year, because he does not want to annoy the BJP; his re-appointment is coming up, and he already has one strike against him, and a nasty lobby working hard to put their own candidate in place (this other chap is a pure disaster, the worst of the worst).

Having said all that, Faizan Sahib remains in the front rank of the country's intellectuals. He is outstanding.

 

[coffee_cup]

That was evasive, not substantive. It wasn't the grammar that I pointed out to you, it was the alphabet, the letters. The word remains what it was; it might, as a living place, have acquired other names. In fact, it has. But when you are referring to the original, you cannot shelter behind the contention that contemporary orthography, in contemporary script, does not allow the original or demands a change.

I wouldn't tell Egyptians that. I would say so only if I had a case to put. I do. When you are in the right frame of mind, and not traducing Indians calling them bharti, I will explain.

Your second sentence read very ironic, on this thread. Very ironic. How strange that you savagely attack a principle in one place, then, in the same thread, draw yourself up to your full height and defend it.

I read and spoke Gurkhali from the age of 7. I studied in Bengali till Class VIII. Subsequently I learnt some other languages. One little couplet I remember from one of those languages is one that you might find useful to imbibe and to follow:

O what a tangled web we weave
When first we set out to deceive.

What is substantive for you, Joe? The same base for an argument as you adopted for Kashmir and Junaghardh? That is, "Heads I win, Tails, you lose"?

And everything else is evasive?

Because if you are, we can spare us this all.

And here at the end, since I read, speak and write German just as good as English, I'll quote Friedrich Nietzsche for you:

"It is very noble hypocrisy not to talk of one's self."

 

[Joe Shearer]

What is substantive for you, Joe? The same base for an argument as you adopted for Kashmir and Junaghardh? That is, "Heads I win, Tails, you lose"?

And everything else is evasive?

Because if you are, we can spare us this all.

And here at the end, since I read, speak and write German just as good as English, I'll quote Friedrich Nietzsche for you:

"It is very noble hypocrisy not to talk of one's self."

What is substantive is that you cannot reproduce the word correctly because of the script that you use, not the grammar, not the language, the script. Saying that you once spoke something else, and then spoke something different, and finally came to where you are doesn't address this point, so it is evasive; it evades the issue and directs our attention somewhere else.

It is sad that when you find no more arguments, you start classifying mine. Instead, it would be worthwhile, for the purposes of the quality of the discussion, although not necessarily for the dash that you might wish to cut among your own fan-boys (you will notice that I do not have that need and never had that questionable benefit), if you stopped talking about issues where you could not make headway. Let us talk about Gandhara, and why you cannot spell it the way it ought to be, or, if you prefer, let us talk about why we feel offended about 'bharti', and that is meretricious, but you can feel offended about P a k i, and that is genuine.

Double standards, much, @coffee_cup ?

 

[Grevion]

I don't watch TV.

I used to be a fan of Faizan Mustafa, until I joined NALSAR. No longer.

You don't watch TV?? What about those Pogo and Spongebob Squarepants stuff??

What was the programme like? It must have been on the Uniform Civil Code. Faizan has been soft pedalling things this whole year, because he does not want to annoy the BJP; his re-appointment is coming up, and he already has one strike against him, and a nasty lobby working hard to put their own candidate in place (this other chap is a pure disaster, the worst of the worst).

Having said all that, Faizan Sahib remains in the front rank of the country's intellectuals. He is outstanding.

Yep it was on uniform civil code and the Muslim and Hindu personal laws. He explained brilliantly about the Muslim laws and how they differ in different states of India say Punjab, UP or Goa. I was quite astonished to know that some small sections of Muslims in India are still governed by the centuries old Hindu laws.

He did make a lot of sense on Muslim personal laws then those Ulema or personal law board guys.