User talk:Haphar

• Archive 1

• Archive 2

Chalte Chalte

Rani said it herself in the reference I put. Why would she lie to a magazine which holds all the facts. It's the media. You can't fool the media. Websites can be wrong not magazines. Please check! It was also important since it was her first with a superstar hero after working with Govinda, Anil Kapoor and Bobby Deol several times.

shez_15 19:11, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

RSS support

RSS is not a political organisation ,So it cannot be linked to political victories or defeats . RSS has a strong cadre support even in southern states like Kerala. This can be known from the fact that at the time of elections , even Political parties like Congress (I) actively seeks its support.Bharatveer 13:45, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

UCC

Be civil and assume good faith.

"The advocates of Hindutva often use the term pseudo-secularism to refer to the Indian Constitution's provisions for minority rights. They point to the different standards for Hindus, Muslims and Christians".

There is no mention of UCC anywhere here; the subject is about special priviledges to the minorities . and thats why "standards" is the correct word. Bharatveer 14:08, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

My "civility" comments were for your allegation of stalking. Yet again in your edit summary you are accusing me of hiding my edits. We can discuss these things even without personal accusations.Bharatveer 15:56, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

pls try to discuss things without personal accusations .Bharatveer 09:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

"The advocates of Hindutva often use the term pseudo-secularism to refer to Indian Constitution's provisions for minority rights".

I find that you keep reverting to this sentence again and again. Can u pls suggest which constitution's provisions are they against?/

I have never suggested that RSS is popular among "all" sections of hindus in "all" parts of India . I modified your attempts to link RSS with any political party. Since it is not a political front; how can its success be gauged with political victories???

Bharatveer 03:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Pls sign your comments. Can you pls state the constitutional laws opposed by Hindutva forces? I never said this following quote to be yours "The advocates of Hindutva often use the term pseudo-secularism to refer to Indian Constitution's provisions for minority rights" .

I changed it as i felt it was incorrect and i gave my reasons. Hindutva forces want Universal Civil Code as per Indian constituion (art 44). The laws they are against are not sanctioned by Indian constituion , they were instituied by the colonial forces and these laws were to be superceded by Our Constitution.

So i still think "standards" is the word to be used there.Bharatveer 10:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you have a misconception of my POV...I have explained on Talk:Hindutva. I am hurt by that conception seriously. But in your favour, you are right, I can't think much about the government having different standards for Hindus and other religions, its more like the way history has treated the different religions, not how the government has treated them. Nobleeagle (Talk) 10:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

"As is obvious by a large number of comments on this page, you have a habit of removing others comments without giving reasons, or entering into discussion. I had given a rebuttal to your points on the talk page for Hindutva, waited for 4 days for a response from you and then reverted back. I make the change, and on the same day withing hours you revert back to your POV without any reasons".

1.Where have I removed other's comments? and when i have never removed anyone's comments on the tlak page why should I give reasons? 2. I have already explained in the talk page why "standards" are more correct than "laws" because pseudosecularism is not just about UCC. 3. Some other editors have also endorsed my views. It is you who is doing the revert giving the same old reasons.Bharatveer 15:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Fundamentalist sockpuppet

Take a look at this talk page and this usercheck verdict. His 3RR violation in 2002 Gujarat violence has been reported. Anwar 15:04, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, a flame war will not serve any purposes here. I am not a fundamentalist. Anwar, however, is an extremist muslim who refuses to listen to reason (I have attempted to dialogue civilly with him with little success). Please refrain from attacks and read my edits calmly and rationally. I have not added any rhetoric, and I have removed anti-Hindu rhetoric added by Anwar. Namaste (Pusyamitra Sunga 15:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

I was presenting a view held by Hindutva advocates, as taken from the Hindutva charter. I was not implying any POV on my part. I constantly wrote "They claim that", 'they contend that', always third person, never first. How am I being 'fundamentalist'? It is you who is being reactionary. Please get an education in the art of writing.Plus, any inflammatory language from my page has been removed, and I have not objected. I agree with that decision. What is with your intense hatred for all things Hindu, anyway? Did you not learn anything about our way of life in school, at home? Whay should all Hindus have to suffer for the errors in one person's upbringing? Is that fair? Think objectively.(Pusyamitra Sunga 15:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC))

Hello Haphar, Just for your information, I have indefblocked Pusyamitra Sunga, as he sent me an email from the same address as User:Subhash bose. Seems to have been evading 3rr and the block with that account. Blnguyen | rant-line 06:06, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Wind-ups

this. Please stop it.Blnguyen | rant-line 08:13, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

It is very sarcastic and is a wind-up. Especially the part in brackets. Also, Sunga is gone now so what is the problem? Subhash_bose is now out for a week for resuming personal attacks after my first week-long block was paroled by User:Mikkalai - (his sparring partner User:WikiSceptic is also out for 10 days). If you are confident you are right there is no need to jump into the mud also - he who makes personal attacks will lose the high moral ground anyway. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 08:25, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I also found this, [1]. Your comparison to Subhash is not exactly valid, as he has been blocked for a week, and you haven't been blocked, so I can't see why you are being ill treated. he has broken the rules and has been sat out. Also, definitely, there is no way that "blind" is as bad as a religious wind-up. A lot of people who are angry that I deleted their autobiography left messages like "jerk" and "ass" on my userpage and I never bothered to block them, although if they did to someone else, I would.Blnguyen | rant-line 00:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

....it is still a lot less inflammatory than kya karega be Haphar 01:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Possibly not many people know this, but I actually don't know any Indian languages. So you might want to translate. Also, it's not a good idea to make sarcastic comments about religious issues, even peripherally so. Blnguyen | rant-line 01:44, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

You may also want to participate in the religion survey at the top of my user talk page.Blnguyen | rant-line 01:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to WikiProject Sikhism

Hi! Thanks for joining WikiProject Sikhism. Please visit the project page and give your thoughts on how we can best begin! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

India quick links

-- utcursch | talk 12:08, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Rani's page

Look, we need to put Chalte Chalte on her career, if not, it leaves a gap between 2002 to 2004. We skip 2003 when there was some success there. You are taking away the actress' work of that year by not mentionning an Aziz Mirza banner film. Thanks for understanding!

--shez15 24:40, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Shiv Sena Article. My take

You implicitly claim that they attacked UP/Bihar'ites because of their ethnicity or because of an inherent belief that they have about Maratha superiority. But the article does not indicate that any such belief system was behind these altercations. The claim of the SS is quite legitimate, that they want preferential representation for local Marathas in Railway positions in Maharashtra. Granted, their TACTICS are a bit questionable, bit their IDEOLOGY is still legitimate and sound. There is no logic behind your going on a polemical rant accusing SS of Fascism since nothing in their ideology reflects any Fascism. Like I said, the best criticism of their ideology is NATIVIST, NOT FASCIST OR HITLERIAN!!!!! Shivsena is not anti non-Maratha but it does support Marathas, albeit a bit aggressively. Everyone should understand the difference between these two. Shivsena did not assault Biharis because of their ethnicity but they advocated for Marathas. To save the Marathas it was necessary to send Beharis back. If the government, in a fit of gutter multiculturalism, chooses to short-change the Marathas, then the Marathas need to respond actively. You are looking at SS from a left-wing liberal lens, marred by self-loathing and negationist pacifism. On the face of it their actions looks very abnormal but if you see the situation from the point of view of working-class Maratha sentimentality then you would perhaps sympathize with their methods. Besides, these are just minor spats that eventually blow over. a compromise is reached and all is well. I've lived in Mumbai for the better part of 15 years and I can assure you that the SS is not the roving gang of maniacal skinhead-esque thugs that the sensationalist media portrays it to be. Netaji 22:50, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

1. As far as your claims of Hitler are concerned, bear in mind that the Lehy (Stern Gang) group in Israel had provided an interesting interpretation. According to them, Hitler was NOT an enemy of the Jewish people but merely one who hated Jews.

2. North America WAS colonized by 'thugs'. The Mayflower pilgrims were 'thugs' by your definition. They wanted to practice a religious philosophy that's much much worse than Hindutva. It was totally intolerant and exclusivist.

'Having chosen to abandon the country for their own economic gains' Because the left-wing congress made it impossible to make any economic gains in an society of Indian-branded Marxism. CAPITALISM, mein freund. THAT's what works. Socialism is a great failure. 'takes full advantage of the liberalism abroad and preaches right wing xenophobia for home.' Nein mein freund. US is a Christian right-wing country, and will remain so in the forseeable future. They have a soverign right to help India develop into a modern Hindu Rashtra, which they have been doing.'Right Wing' xenophobia is better then left-wing Marxist oppression , censorship. 'parts of the Muslim diaspora' PARTS?!?!??! Try bloody almost ALL of the muslim diaspora. Ever heard of C.A.I.R http://www.danielpipes.org/article/3437,http://www.danielpipes.org/article/394? Plus there is no such thing as Islamic 'fundamentalism'. The claim of Islamic 'fundamentalism' gives rise to the illusion that there is a 'non-fundamental' kind of Islam. There is only one kind of Islam. The kind that blows things up.Netaji 12:54, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

1. and Indian history professors are all saints, right brother? Call your doctor, your intravenous drip needs adjusting, then read Arun Shourie's book on Indian historians.

1. lol now I'm enjoying your twisting my words to suit your agenda. I wasn't talking about the US government doing anything for India, but the Indian diaspora itself (ever hear of USINPAC?). And yes, my friend, we have many sympathizers in the US political landscape. Neoconservatives being only the first. Now allow me to quote my native Bengali 'Amaar Shonar chele shomajbader shopno dekho raate aar diner bala bhikke koro rastaye'.

1. Not Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is a feudal dump. I'm talking about Israel. The Jewish State is the ideal model for a Hindu Rashtra.

1. I'm not upset about fundamentalism in Islam because there is no fundamentalism in Islam. Islam ITSELF is 'fundamentalist', in the sense of Intolerance, Slaughter, Looting, Arson, Molestation of women, ie I-S-L-A-M. The very word 'ISLAM' means 'submission to God'. Well I, for one, refuse to submit to their god through the UPA government. Sammihit Bharat! Netaji 15:59, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets

Yes. If there is an abusive sockpuppet confirmed, there is precedent to identify the master -- Samir धर्म 00:23, 21 July 2006 (UTC)