Terrorists or gunmen

by truthbetold Sat Jan 02, 2016 10:10 pm

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/militants-across-the-border-attack-pathankot-air-base/article8058924.ece?homepage=true

The Hindu calls them terrorists. TOI called them terrorist and jehadis.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-35211265

BBC calls them Gunmen and militants.

CNN, and NY Times refer to them as gunmen. Associated Press provided the story. They all refrained from using the term terrorists.

by confuzzled dude Sat Jan 02, 2016 10:34 pm

The word that raised my eyebrows was "Martyred" Indian newspapers headlines said something to the effect of: IAF personnel martyred.

by Hellsangel Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:06 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:The word that raised my eyebrows was "Martyred" Indian newspapers headlines said something to the effect of: IAF personnel martyred.

Why did it raise your eyebrows, Comrade?

by southindian Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:49 pm

Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.

by confuzzled dude Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:55 pm

southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.

You old senile bastard, STFU.

by confuzzled dude Sat Jan 02, 2016 11:56 pm

Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:The word that raised my eyebrows was "Martyred" Indian newspapers headlines said something to the effect of: IAF personnel martyred.
Why did it raise your eyebrows, Comrade?

Are military causalities routinely called martyrs?

by southindian Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:18 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.

LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

by confuzzled dude Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:24 am

southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

Avivek, we will talk when you learn to spell "Kerala" properly.

by southindian Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:43 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n
Avivek, we will talk when you learn to spell "Kerala" properly.

No CD, I will never talk to you. I will respond. Smile

Breath-in, Breath-out. Play same track again. And if you could play same CD track till December 31st, you can go to 2017.

I think you are looking for Karela.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:52 am

southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

Hello Avivek, still gloating over your hero's shrewdness? #YoNamoSoShrewd he wants to continue his bromance with Sharif even if more such attacks occur!!

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Jan 03, 2016 1:54 am

truthbetold wrote:http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/militants-across-the-border-attack-pathankot-air-base/article8058924.ece?homepage=true

The Hindu calls them terrorists. TOI called them terrorist and jehadis.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-35211265

BBC calls them Gunmen and militants.

CNN, and NY Times refer to them as gunmen. Associated Press provided the story. They all refrained from using the term terrorists.

Oh don't you know? They are terrorists iff they shout allahuakbar and kill *white* people. Else mere gunmen.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sun Jan 03, 2016 2:07 am

confuzzled dude wrote:The word that raised my eyebrows was "Martyred" Indian newspapers headlines said something to the effect of: IAF personnel martyred.

Would you prefer: "IAF Kafirs Scholonged"?

by southindian Sun Jan 03, 2016 2:10 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

Hello Avivek, still gloating over your hero's shrewdness? #YoNamoSoShrewd he wants to continue his bromance with Sharif even if more such attacks occur!!

Aaha Northindian, fortunately no muslims died, so rejoice. Am surprised no mention of Modi/BJP intolerance or award return after this. Attack on Indian army base is your gloat time so you are allowed to flaunt and post.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Jan 03, 2016 2:29 am

southindian wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
southindian wrote:Because at his age he's proud he can raise something. That's why.
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

Hello Avivek, still gloating over your hero's shrewdness? #YoNamoSoShrewd he wants to continue his bromance with Sharif even if more such attacks occur!!
Aaha Northindian, fortunately no muslims died, so rejoice. Am surprised no mention of Modi/BJP intolerance or award return after this. Attack on Indian army base is your gloat time so you are allowed to flaunt and post.

I note that you just can't bring yourself to condemn this act of Paki terrorism. Such shrewdness!!

by southindian Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:35 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
southindian wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
southindian wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
You old senile bastard, STFU.
LOL. CD, breath in, breath out. Play same track agian.n

Hello Avivek, still gloating over your hero's shrewdness? #YoNamoSoShrewd he wants to continue his bromance with Sharif even if more such attacks occur!!
Aaha Northindian, fortunately no muslims died, so rejoice. Am surprised no mention of Modi/BJP intolerance or award return after this. Attack on Indian army base is your gloat time so you are allowed to flaunt and post.

I note that you just can't bring yourself to condemn this act of Paki terrorism. Such shrewdness!!

Hah! Pakis are terrorist alright and sponsor of terrorism in India. Thanks for crossing over and finally accepting it.

by Vakavaka Pakapaka Sun Jan 03, 2016 10:44 am

TBT
Yes. This is not new. BBC and CNN have always been like this. For example, Christiane Amanpour used to be pro-Pakis. To a large extent, the media in the US and UK reflect the policies of both countries toward India. While we blame Nehru for the Kashmir problem, in the UN, both the US and UK played games against India for decades. Unfortunately, the media in India is not very mature. They will hurt the country for their selfish ends. Burkha Dutt, Varadarajan, Vir Singhvi, etc., are examples of such jerks.

by Hellsangel Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:26 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:The word that raised my eyebrows was "Martyred" Indian newspapers headlines said something to the effect of: IAF personnel martyred.
Why did it raise your eyebrows, Comrade?
Are military causalities routinely called martyrs?

Were your eyebrows too heavy in November, Comrade?

http://www.timesofindia.com/india/Col-Santosh-Mahadik-martyred-in-Jammu-and-Kashmir-yesterday-honoured-by-Army/articleshow/49826000.cms

by seven Wed Jan 06, 2016 10:58 pm

It's an act of terror. Truth be told, it's an act of war. But we can't prove Pakistani govt was involved, we cannot call it war. But it's not just gunmen shooting on streets. These were terrorists.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Jan 07, 2016 12:19 am

seven wrote:It's an act of terror. Truth be told, it's an act of war. But we can't prove Pakistani govt was involved, we cannot call it war. But it's not just gunmen shooting on streets. These were terrorists.

The US invaded Iraq in response to 9/11 - to which Iraq had no connection whatsoever.

by seven Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:03 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
seven wrote:It's an act of terror. Truth be told, it's an act of war. But we can't prove Pakistani govt was involved, we cannot call it war. But it's not just gunmen shooting on streets. These were terrorists.

The US invaded Iraq in response to 9/11 - to which Iraq had no connection whatsoever.

US is immature n jumpy. India is another extreme.
As for gunmen vs terrorists, I think they were terrorists.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Jan 07, 2016 1:39 am

seven wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
seven wrote:It's an act of terror. Truth be told, it's an act of war. But we can't prove Pakistani govt was involved, we cannot call it war. But it's not just gunmen shooting on streets. These were terrorists.

The US invaded Iraq in response to 9/11 - to which Iraq had no connection whatsoever.
US is immature n jumpy. India is another extreme.
As for gunmen vs terrorists, I think they were terrorists.

But Seven, they didn't kill any white people. So they can't be called terrorists. If you don't like 'gunmen', we can call them insurgents. Except 26/11 where lots of white people died, all other bombings and mass shootings in India were at the hands of insurgents wonly.

by Hellsangel Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:15 pm

Is this guy a martyr, Comrade?

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Sat Jan 09, 2016 2:27 pm

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:TBT
Yes. This is not new. BBC and CNN have always been like this. For example, Christiane Amanpour used to be pro-Pakis. To a large extent, the media in the US and UK reflect the policies of both countries toward India. While we blame Nehru for the Kashmir problem, in the UN, both the US and UK played games against India for decades. Unfortunately, the media in India is not very mature. They will hurt the country for their selfish ends. Burkha Dutt, Varadarajan, Vir Singhvi, etc., are examples of such jerks.

Varadarajan is an AMERICAN... and worse, a Brahmin and a NRam's chumcha.

by truthbetold Sat Jan 09, 2016 6:18 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Is this guy a martyr, Comrade?

HA,

Yes. CD is defining martyr as some one who lays down his life for religion. In CD's mind this guy died for Islam.

India translates 'Amar hai' to 'became a martyr'. Anyone who lost his/her life in the service of the country is identified as martyr.

by Merlot Daruwala Sat Jan 09, 2016 7:51 pm

truthbetold wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is this guy a martyr, Comrade?

HA,

Yes. CD is defining martyr as some one who lays down his life for religion. In CD's mind this guy died for Islam.

India translates 'Amar hai' to 'became a martyr'. Anyone who lost his/her life in the service of the country is identified as martyr.

And yet we don't say that of cops who die on duty, or teachers or sarkari babus. We don't even say that of soldiers who die of heart attacks or car crashes. So the manner of death and at whose hands is equally important.

by truthbetold Sun Jan 10, 2016 12:54 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
truthbetold wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is this guy a martyr, Comrade?

HA,

Yes. CD is defining martyr as some one who lays down his life for religion. In CD's mind this guy died for Islam.

India translates 'Amar hai' to 'became a martyr'. Anyone who lost his/her life in the service of the country is identified as martyr.

And yet we don't say that of cops who die on duty, or teachers or sarkari babus. We don't even say that of soldiers who die of heart attacks or car crashes. So the manner of death and at whose hands is equally important.

May be I am mistaken to think all on such forum understand the difference between fighting a terrorist and dying of heart attack.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Jan 10, 2016 6:46 am

truthbetold wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:
truthbetold wrote:
Hellsangel wrote:Is this guy a martyr, Comrade?

HA,

Yes. CD is defining martyr as some one who lays down his life for religion. In CD's mind this guy died for Islam.

India translates 'Amar hai' to 'became a martyr'. Anyone who lost his/her life in the service of the country is identified as martyr.

And yet we don't say that of cops who die on duty, or teachers or sarkari babus. We don't even say that of soldiers who die of heart attacks or car crashes. So the manner of death and at whose hands is equally important.

May be I am mistaken to think all on such forum understand the difference between fighting a terrorist and dying of heart attack.

I was just helping you refine your incredibly loose definition. Inane and ungrateful too!

by seven Sun Jan 10, 2016 6:39 pm

CD chose to raise his eyebrows at soldiers that died. Of course how one dies defines if they were martyr. But calling these dead soldiers that wasn't raised eyebrow worthy, especially given the other big more significant things that happened n were mentioned in the article.
That's why CD's eyebrows are mock worthy.

by confuzzled dude Sun Jan 10, 2016 8:59 pm

seven wrote:CD chose to raise his eyebrows at soldiers that died. Of course how one dies defines if they were martyr. But calling these dead soldiers that wasn't raised eyebrow worthy, especially given the other big more significant things that happened n were mentioned in the article.
That's why CD's eyebrows are mock worthy.

Hope realize that with your statement you have equated soldiers fighting for their country to terrorists.

by truthbetold Sun Jan 10, 2016 9:17 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
seven wrote:CD chose to raise his eyebrows at soldiers that died. Of course how one dies defines if they were martyr. But calling these dead soldiers that wasn't raised eyebrow worthy, especially given the other big more significant things that happened n were mentioned in the article.
That's why CD's eyebrows are mock worthy.
Hope realize that with your statement you have equated soldiers fighting for their country to terrorists.

I may missed few posts. CD, can you help me understand how soldiers and terrorists are equated?

by Merlot Daruwala Mon Jan 11, 2016 12:43 am

truthbetold wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
seven wrote:CD chose to raise his eyebrows at soldiers that died. Of course how one dies defines if they were martyr. But calling these dead soldiers that wasn't raised eyebrow worthy, especially given the other big more significant things that happened n were mentioned in the article.
That's why CD's eyebrows are mock worthy.
Hope realize that with your statement you have equated soldiers fighting for their country to terrorists.

I may missed few posts. CD, can you help me understand how soldiers and terrorists are equated?

Unkil, the equation arises when you define a martyr as one who dies at the hands of a terrorist while defending the country.

When Indian soldiers are killed by Pakistani solders and vice versa, the dying and killing parties are both fighting for their country. So while the dead are automatically martyrs to the respective nation, the killers can't be called terrorists. Hope this clarifies.

by truthbetold Mon Jan 11, 2016 6:31 am

Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.

by Merlot Daruwala Mon Jan 11, 2016 7:09 am

truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.

Unkil, you've clearly lost it. Inane, ungrateful and incredibly dense too. Have a good day.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 11, 2016 8:08 am

truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.

What about chaddi apologists, are they friends of the nation? who with their jingoistic fervor & over the top chest thumping, troubling their God and putting their ideologies ahead of nation's integrity. This seems to be the most disloyal bunch, as they always seems to dream about Akhand Bharath while disrespecting the nation they live and breath in.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Jan 11, 2016 8:40 am

confuzzled dude wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.
What about chaddi apologists, are they friends of the nation? who with their jingoistic fervor & over the top chest thumping, troubling their God and putting their ideologies ahead of nation's integrity. This seems to be the most disloyal bunch, as they always seems to dream about Akhand Bharath while disrespecting the nation they live and breath in.

Ahhh...the uual "take diversion" technique.

Stick to Jehaids, Jehadi terrorism, Jehadi apologists, Pseudo-Jehadis, and Pathankot terrorism.

by confuzzled dude Mon Jan 11, 2016 8:15 pm

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.
What about chaddi apologists, are they friends of the nation? who with their jingoistic fervor & over the top chest thumping, troubling their God and putting their ideologies ahead of nation's integrity. This seems to be the most disloyal bunch, as they always seems to dream about Akhand Bharath while disrespecting the nation they live and breath in.

Ahhh...the uual "take diversion" technique.

Stick to Jehaids, Jehadi terrorism, Jehadi apologists, Pseudo-Jehadis, and Pathankot terrorism.

Diversion? Chaddi apologists were grumbling all over this thread about my questioning the usage of word martyr.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Mon Jan 11, 2016 11:59 pm

confuzzled dude wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.
What about chaddi apologists, are they friends of the nation? who with their jingoistic fervor & over the top chest thumping, troubling their God and putting their ideologies ahead of nation's integrity. This seems to be the most disloyal bunch, as they always seems to dream about Akhand Bharath while disrespecting the nation they live and breath in.

Ahhh...the uual "take diversion" technique.

Stick to Jehaids, Jehadi terrorism, Jehadi apologists, Pseudo-Jehadis, and Pathankot terrorism.
Diversion? Chaddi apologists were grumbling all over this thread about my questioning the usage of word martyr.

We all duly note that you are yet to condemn the muslim terrorist attack at Pathankot.

by Merlot Daruwala Tue Jan 12, 2016 12:48 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
confuzzled dude wrote:
truthbetold wrote:Jehadi apologist,

A nation's enemies come in different forms including jehadi terrorist. Defending against all forms of enemies qualifies for 'amar hai' .

Your twisted interpretation is an example of your jehadi apologist logic. The supporters of jehadi terrorists do call them martyrs who qualify for 72 virgins. However, execept for jehadi apologists, rest of the world considers the likes of afzal guru and jehadi terrorists just mindless killers.
What about chaddi apologists, are they friends of the nation? who with their jingoistic fervor & over the top chest thumping, troubling their God and putting their ideologies ahead of nation's integrity. This seems to be the most disloyal bunch, as they always seems to dream about Akhand Bharath while disrespecting the nation they live and breath in.

Ahhh...the uual "take diversion" technique.

Stick to Jehaids, Jehadi terrorism, Jehadi apologists, Pseudo-Jehadis, and Pathankot terrorism.
Diversion? Chaddi apologists were grumbling all over this thread about my questioning the usage of word martyr.

We all duly note that you are yet to condemn the muslim terrorist attack at Pathankot.

Aunty, even by your own low standards when it comes to deceit and dissembly, this is ridiculous. It was you and fellow chaddis who went totally groundhog when Pathankot happened, resurfacing only now, after public opinion forced NaMo to backtrack from his bromance with Mian Sharif.

by Hellsangel Wed Jan 13, 2016 1:11 pm

by Sponsored content