it difficult 2 digest such an arrogant behaviour from shiv sainiks, cyber cafe not only give access 2 orkut but millions of web sites, y need sainiks 2 behave like islamic organisations, who demonstrate here saddam hussain and osama bin laden, dont follow the instincts of islamic non scence attitude...........
RE:unaccepable behaviour
by sri kanth on Jun 11, 2007 01:48 PM Permalink
does it make shiva sena mahan who started resembling like puppets of islam what difference wil exist between them, is it accepatable if some one making non scence we do follow them.........
RE:regardless of ORKUT's existence.....
by Benedict Fernandes on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Your are absolutly on target...I agree with you..these people want us to go to dark ages again..they have made democracy a joke....bullshit
RE:regardless of ORKUT's existence.....
by Laker on Jun 11, 2007 01:28 PM Permalink
Orkut is causing lots of damage to our society. Good job by Shiva Sena
RE:Old Hypocrite Fool isPeTHOOK-re
by Ponga Pandit on Jun 11, 2007 01:22 PM Permalink
Seeing ur post here, it seems ur parents failed to control u too! LOLZ
RE:Old Hypocrite Fool isPeTHOOK-re
by bendoverthere on Jun 11, 2007 01:24 PM Permalink
my parents r still with me....& nobody's wife in our family is living separately from her husband a la smita thook-re.....& my parents made me courageous & rational....neither ponga nor pandit.....dono hi useless hain......
and i too believe ..its the public who is the most corrupt and spineless ...we take decisions based on fear and greed and not thru our conscience ...why to blame only shiv sainiks ...why dont u see - gurjars for quota, muslims for danish cartoonist, naxalites and tribals for land, insurgents in various states for power...all of them r resorting to violence, because that is the norm of our time ...and why our time, violence is used to propogate one's (religion, caste, country, ethinicity) thoughts from time immemorial ...and will remain the most potent way to subjugate others ...gandhi's policies of non-violence was a blip
RE:i watched Aparichit (Anniyan in Tamil) yestday...
by Ponga Pandit on Jun 11, 2007 01:20 PM Permalink
Lagta hain aaj kal ke log "common sense" se "Aparichit" hain!! ;)
internet is not to hate people and communities. So, orkut should check these weeds. It right of shivsainiks to raise their voice. It may be loud and high. But, orkut should check hate messages...
RE:internet if not for hate
by sasi .k.a narayanan on Jun 11, 2007 01:36 PM Permalink
they can raise voice. there is a method to block any message/or gruop
for that this sainiks should report it first showing gundaism is not the only think in the world
they should also understand, it is the liberty of a person to hate balthakarey or shiv sena
Freedome of Expression has always has double standards.
Let us take the simplest example. Every liberal I know argued that MF Husain had the right to paint a naked Saraswati or a nude Bharat Mata. Yet, hardly any liberal of my acquaintance extended the same principle to the Danish cartoons. The liberal position was that Hindus should be tolerant of the manner in which their gods and goddesses were portrayed but that Muslims were right to complain about any visual representation of the Prophet Mohammed.
It is not necessary to be a fully paid-up member of the RSS to recognise that there is a huge logical contradiction here. The Muslim objections to the Danish cartoons were not based on the Muslims-are-terrorists subtext of the content. Muslims argued that even if the content had been laudatory, even if the Prophet had been portrayed as the saviour of the modern world, it would still have been deeply offensive to have seen a visual representation of the Prophet Mohammed.
So why is it okay to show Hindu goddesses in the nude and not okay to show the founder of Islam in any form at all, flattering or otherwise?
The Muslim contention is that Islam forbids its followers from visually representing the Prophet. This is fair enough and Muslims are entitled to regard this stipulation as binding.
But what about the rest of us? We don%u2019t necessarily believe in Islam. Why should we be subject to Quranic injunctions? Why are liberals, who claim to value freedom of expression,
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Rehan on Jun 11, 2007 01:23 PM Permalink
Kinda confused... can you please elaborate on Islamic front?
RE:RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:30 PM Permalink
Were you asleep when Muslims in India were attacking Hindu shops protesting Danish cartoons?
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by adfasd asdasd on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Totally agree with you....
I think nobody should have the right to display any religious symbols in a manner that may denigrate its sacredness, be it of any religion.
However we also should not tone our opinions as of us and them, we should stand united against all sorts the MF Hussains and the Danish cartoonists together.
If at all you are defending the RSS or want to argue on the us and them formula, let me ask you this, how many liberal non-muslims stood up against the Danish Cartoonists???
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Rahul Menon on Jun 11, 2007 01:22 PM Permalink
We don't have any stipulation with regard to showing our Gods and godesses in the nude. I have been to many temples and have come across nude and semi nude dieties in various positions so i guess no Hindu should take offence to that.
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Upadrasta PardhaSaradhi on Jun 11, 2007 01:34 PM Permalink
Mr, Anything & everything in this world has its limits. 'Freedom' has its limits and 'tolerance' too.
Whatever you have seen in the Temples are one way of promoting the kamasuthra in a nicer way. Place is important. You do all sort of things with your wife in your bedroom secretely and personally. Why dont you do it publicly infront of everybody? Moral of the story is there is a limit for everything and place for everything. You can not take bath in Dining room and cook in the bath room.
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Menon Sahib: MF Hussain has been showing Hindu goddesses having sex with dogs.
RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Utkal Mohanty on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
Don't you see the difference? There is an injuction gainst depiction of Allah or the Prophet as an image. There is no injuction against depiction of Hindu Gods and goddesses or Bharat Mata, in the nude or otherwise. Depiction in nude by itself does not make an image deragatory. Kali is routinely depicted in the nude. So are many avtars of Parvati / Shakti. There are passgaes of explicit lovemaking betwen Shiva nad Parvati in Kalidasa's Kumarasamhava. So it is a part of the Hindu tradition. But you are right about non-muslims not having to follow that diktat. Many liberals have supported Danish governments stand on that. Salman Rushdie's Writing on Mohammaed wasn't to Many muslim's liking. The liberal media supported him. So don't pick on the liberals. It is we in India who have to develop a more tolerant attitude and learn to have intellectual discourses rather than street fights.
RE:RE:FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION - double Standards.
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:35 PM Permalink
Abye oriya king mohanty
MF Hussain has been making "derogatory? images of Hindu goddesses like Durga having sex with a dog and Sita having sex with Hanuman. It is idiot hindus like you who are the root cause of trouble.
"There is an injuction gainst depiction of Allah or the Prophet as an image."
Fine. But there is injunction in showing Prophet's wives as an image. So why not a nude picture of Mo's wife Aisha? MF Hussain is clearly doing "painting jihad" and is careful to avoid Muslim themes. He quickly withdrew his latest movie on a complaint from some muslims that it hurt their sentiments. The liberals did not utter a word.
RE:Prayer to all gods Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Parsi, Budhist, jain and all
by felix nicholas on Jun 11, 2007 01:31 PM Permalink
god is man's cretion
RE:RE:Prayer to all gods Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Parsi, Budhist, jain and all
by felix nicholas on Jun 11, 2007 01:32 PM Permalink
SORRY, IT WAS CREATION.
RE:Prayer to all gods Hindu, Muslim, Christian, Sikh, Parsi, Budhist, jain and all
by Tinda on Jun 11, 2007 01:36 PM Permalink
Where were you when congee/commie govt. banned all blogs that critisied their govt.? did you have a similar prayer that time?
All people....maybe the Shiv Sena activists or even the anti-Shiv Sena people....are hypocites!
No one raised a voice of protest when m k gandhi was shown pole dancing....hindu gods and goddesses were painted in the nude...chhatrapati shivaji maharaj was belittled in a book....
....so why raise a voice now that some over-zealous Shiv Sena activists ransacked a cyber cafe????
RE:All are hypocrites!
by Rakeysh Chopra on Jun 11, 2007 01:34 PM Permalink
he got no point there , dude. The inside story of Shiv sainiks was that their local leader Mr.P. Manjrekar had an enemity with that particular cyber cafe owner. That was the reason to ransack his cyber cafe, to ruin his business and livelihood rather than ill-founded love for shivaji or anyone equally irrelevant.
RE:RE:RE:Biharification of Mumbai...
by prasoon chaudhary on Jun 11, 2007 01:23 PM Permalink
R U ppl here to start a new regional war?? Mumbai is financial capital..so it has to be better..wats point!!
