WAB's Mods defending Jehadi Terrorists in India

[Officer of Engineers]

Let it go, Sri. You're not going to win this one. You either want the mods to kill all these disciussions all together or let this one thing go. I suggest you let it go.

Now.

[Shek]

I'm not a moderator in any forum, am I free to sympathize with the Al Quaida?


A terrorist being arrested with arms/ammunition. Scape goat indeed!

Post the thread where a mod has supported a terrorist. Use the hyperlinked # in the top right corner of the post. You haven't shown a single shred of evidence yet, and have had the opposite effect of not singling out anyone by impugning all the mods instead of the single offender that you allude to. So far, your mod claim rings so hollow as to hurt my ears.

[Srirangan]

So you mean to say no specific exceptions will be made? Ok, If that's the case then why is there a specific exception for "Pakistan"'s translation into English?

[Officer of Engineers]

Let it go. Now.

[TopHatter]

So you mean to say no specific exceptions will be made? Ok, If that's the case then why is there a specific exception for "Pakistan"'s translation into English?

Question: Why this almost fanatical insistence in using that term? Why is it necessary? English speaking posters are quite well aware of what the word "Pakistan" refers to. Most of us here on the WAB can also locate it on map. We certainly don't need a translation of the word into English.

[indianguy4u]

In this thread Mujahideen protest massacere of hindu's Lunatock asked this question . What was the motive behind this? What if i ask, why dont americans believe when bin laden says when rejects his involvement in 9/11.

In the same thread i posted a post of PDF Moderator, blaming US forces for iraqi civilians lifes. Whats ur reactions to that?

[Shek]

In this thread Mujahideen protest massacere of hindu's Lunatock asked this question . What was the motive behind this? What if i ask, why dont americans believe when bin laden says when rejects his involvement in 9/11.

In the same thread i posted a post of PDF Moderator, blaming US forces for iraqi civilians lifes. Whats ur reactions to that?

IG4U,
I see Luna's question as legitimate, posing a hypothetical what if it were fully true that the said jihadi group weren't responsible for the death of the innocent Hindus and were truly apologetic. I won't claim to understand anything beyond generalities about Kasmir; however, knowing how divergent many of the jihadi groups, I find it quite plausible that the group could be serious and not just involved in propaganda ops to seperate themselves from the terrorist attack. That isn't to say that I buy the statement, just that in the absence of knowledge about the group Luna poses the question about, I find it to be plausible.

As far as the incident that Plat comments on, having not seen the video, I can't comment on the specificities. However, in general, I would agree with a statement that innocent Iraqi non-combatants have been killed in fighting and at the hands of US troops. That is a fact. However, I would dispute that in these cases, there was an intent to deliberately target non-combatants or a disregard taken in trying to avoid situations where non-combatants would be injured and/or killed.

Anyways, thanks for posting what Sri was alluding to, although I still don't see why this wasn't taken up with the mods directly instead of in a swan song fashion.

[Officer of Engineers]

People,

You're risking a complete crack down. Start with a blank slate as of today. Let yesterday be yesterday.

Let it go.

Now.

[Srirangan]

People,

You're risking a complete crack down. Start with a blank slate as of today. Let yesterday be yesterday.

Let it go.

Now.

Why a selective crackdown? Why is "pure land" banned but "poor scapegoat terrorists caught with arms & ammunition" allowed? Be fair.

[indianguy4u]

IG4U,
I see Luna's question as legitimate, posing a hypothetical what if it were fully true that the said jihadi group weren't responsible for the death of the innocent Hindus and were truly apologetic. I won't claim to understand anything beyond generalities about Kasmir; however, knowing how divergent many of the jihadi groups, I find it quite plausible that the group could be serious and not just involved in propaganda ops to seperate themselves from the terrorist attack. That isn't to say that I buy the statement, just that in the absence of knowledge about the group Luna poses the question about, I find it to be plausible.

Sir,
U forgot to answer, "Will americans accept bin laden's statements about his non-involvement in 9/11?"?

Anyways, thanks for posting what Sri was alluding to, although I still don't see why this wasn't taken up with the mods directly instead of in a swan song fashion.

No No. This is not what Srirangan was protesting for. Thats different thread. Here is the Link & the post is this.

[TopHatter]

Why a selective crackdown? Why is "pure land" banned but "poor scapegoat terrorists caught with arms & ammunition" allowed? Be fair.

Sri,
The Colonel has given good advice. Please heed it. :)

[Shek]

Why a selective crackdown? Why is "pure land" banned but "poor scapegoat terrorists caught with arms & ammunition" allowed? Be fair.

Why are you quoting yourself? Or are you trying to pass off your quote as something a mod said? If so, you are making yourself eligible to be the first person for the ramp up from a selective to a complete crack down.

Keep singing that swan song and don't listen to OoE if that's what you want.

[Shek]

Sir,
U forgot to answer, "Will americans accept bin laden's statements about his non-involvement in 9/11?"?

No No. This is not what Srirangan was protesting for. Thats different thread. Here is the Link & the post is this.

1. Considering that OBL is on tape talking about the 9/11 attacks and how he planned them and what his expectations were, I'd say that OBL doesn't believe himself.

2. Look at the title of the thread. If after nearly 2000 posts he hasn't figured out who a mod is and isn't (or that they appear with a bright green label), then maybe he needs to get out of the weeds so he can learn more about the board. The appropriate action would have been to report the post using the "!" button in the bottom left corner of a post and then post on the same thread. Instead, he's chosen a path that may lead to self-martrydom on the altar of WAB protest and hasn't acknowledged that he was wrong to accuse a mod, if these links are truly what he was protesting. He's compounding his error by adding words to mod's statements and then passing them off as quotes.

Regardless of what actions the mods should or should not take against Asim, he is behaving irresponsibly, and if I were a mod, I'd jam him for trying to shove false words in my mouth after much warning and advice to cease and desist from very senior board members.

If there is a perceived bias on any subject, a more effective manner to deal with it would be to write Asim and the mods and work this out in private, accept the final decision of those who are charged with policing the board, and then choose to either remain as a poster or protest by no longer posting instead of posting on a downward spiraling thread.

[Ray]

You can always appoint Ray as you personal interprettor Parihaka!
No offence Ray! :)

Better still, Neo, since he is the diplomatic type! ;)

He is already doing so at the Airport when illegals are hauled up!

He understands Urdu and lives in Holland and so understands the western psyche!

[kNikS]

I don't know what's so insultive with translation of Pakistan but on the other side if Asim want's to believe that terrorists are scapegoats I'm not sure how is that insultive. In best case I find that foolish. I think that he could explain what "poor scapegoat" means.

One more thing - is there something apocaliptic about this topic and I'm unaware of it?