DELETED DELETED DELETED

Report issues and problems regarding the Forum or troublesome members here. If you have suggestions and ideas on how we can improve this Forum/Website please let us know.
Biradar
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

DELETED DELETED DELETED

#1

Unread post by Biradar » Tue Sep 15, 2015 8:17 pm

Given that the Admin is now changing people's posts, it seems pointless to comment here on any matter. The Admin is welcome to create a forum of sycophants, which, pretty much will go down to zero participants, from the already tiny handful it has. I strongly suggest to the Admin not to edit posts. Otherwise you pretty soon will have no one to say DELETED to, as there won't be anyone posting any more.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#2

Unread post by fayyaaz » Thu Sep 17, 2015 8:53 am

I suggest that this forum be renamed:

"[deleted] anajmi, muffy and their bashers".



dawedaar
Posts: 844
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:40 pm

#3

Unread post by dawedaar » Thu Sep 17, 2015 11:44 am

Biradar, every forum have their rules of conduct. This forum is not a reddit or some public trolling website. This website involves sensitive issue of religion and culture. It has to be moderated!
Biradar wrote:Given that the Admin is now changing people's posts, it seems pointless to comment here on any matter. The Admin is welcome to create a forum of sycophants, which, pretty much will go down to zero participants, from the already tiny handful it has. I strongly suggest to the Admin not to edit posts. Otherwise you pretty soon will have no one to say DELETED to, as there won't be anyone posting any more.



Biradar
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#4

Unread post by Biradar » Thu Sep 17, 2015 1:44 pm

Moderation is good. No problem. However, lets be realistic. The question is: what is worse? Belittling the fundamentals of Shia understanding of Islam, everything that is connected with Ismailisim, or someone calling the all-powerful, rich and monstrous da'i an "idiot"? Please let us know.

There is another way to think about this. The da'i is powerful and wants to suppress those who oppose him. People who have no power express their view, sometimes use impolite language. However, that is the only weapon the powerless and helpless have. To moderate that frustration is to further the Kothar's agenda, as that is exactly what they want. They do not want a forum or a means of redress. They want to control people's thoughts, their language and make sure that they (Kothar) are never critiqued.

Also, you talk about "sensitive issues". Who gets to define what is sensitive? You? Or the Admin? Or the Kothar?

However, I understand it is Admin's right to do anything he wants. In general, people vote with their feet. What we see here is a steep decline in participation, and specially high-quality discussions. We have been reduced to a clown show of Al Noor saying ridiculous things, Anajmi egging him on and Jai making a mess of things. We are now at a point where the noise drowns out the signal. This is not a good place for a forum to be. But again, its the Admin's right to moderate, and I do not contest that. I just suggest that they not do it in a way which moderates the little things while letting the elephants be. Thats all.
dawedaar wrote:Biradar, every forum have their rules of conduct. This forum is not a reddit or some public trolling website. This website involves sensitive issue of religion and culture. It has to be moderated!
Biradar wrote:Given that the Admin is now changing people's posts, it seems pointless to comment here on any matter. The Admin is welcome to create a forum of sycophants, which, pretty much will go down to zero participants, from the already tiny handful it has. I strongly suggest to the Admin not to edit posts. Otherwise you pretty soon will have no one to say DELETED to, as there won't be anyone posting any more.



SBM
Posts: 6157
Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 4:01 am

#5

Unread post by SBM » Thu Sep 17, 2015 2:00 pm

I am not sure whose side should I take.
While I agree too much moderation can kill a topic,
While Biradar wants people to vent their frustration by calling out names of Kothari Mafia we had others who questioned the wisdom, whether name calling of Kothari Goons is discouraging many fence sitting Abdes/Amtes to visit this forum
Quandary for the Admin/Moderators....



alam
Posts: 712
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2013 8:15 pm

#6

Unread post by alam » Thu Sep 17, 2015 2:16 pm

OPed in USA today on Free Speech vs Hate Speech. How timely it parallels this forum discussion! Enjoy :D

Recommit to free speech on campus: Our view Editorial Board
University of Chicago takes the lead; other colleges fail to follow.
Give leaders at the University of Chicago an "A" for standing up for much-beleaguered freedom of speech on campus, and hand an "F" to many of the nation's colleges and universities for running in the opposite direction.
In recent years, the assault on campus free speech has often been led by an unlikely source: the students whose predecessors a generation ago were at the vanguard of debate and protest. Sometimes the motive is the usual suspect, liberal political correctness that seeks to scrub colleges of any conservative ideas. But recently, a desire by students to protect themselves and others from speech they consider hurtful is driving new assaults on academic freedom and freewheeling debate.

Just as children raised in overly clean houses devoid of bacteria become more vulnerable to allergies and asthma, many of today's college students — protected by "helicopter parents" — have become fearful of anything that could make them or their friends uncomfortable. President Obama criticized such oversensitivity at a town hall meeting in Des Moines on Monday, saying he disagreed with college students who "have to be coddled and protected from different points of view. ... That's not the way we learn."
Yet college administrators are often too happy to oblige their fragile students with speech codes, speech zones, disinvitations of controversial speakers and heavy-handed sanctions on anyone who dares to defy the strict rules — rules that seldom stand up to legal scrutiny when someone challenges them in court. More than half of 437 institutions surveyed last year by FIRE, a free-speech advocacy group, had restrictive speech codes; one in six confined anything that smacked of students' free expression to a special zone, often some out-of-the-way patch of campus land.
In January, the University of Chicago revolted against this dangerous trend, reaffirming its commitment to "completely free and open discussion of ideas,” even when some or even most members of the community find the ideas “offensive, unwise, immoral or wrong-headed.” The rationale? University President Hanna Holborn Gray put it well: “Education should not be intended to make people comfortable, it is meant to make them think.”
To underscore how far universities have strayed from that goal, in the eight months since Chicago's policy statement, just two institutions have followed suit: Purdue University, the only public school to do so, and Princeton. Now, FIRE, the free-speech group, has launched a campaign to encourage more universities to join.
It won't be easy, given the lengths to which university leaders and students have gone to clamp down on ideas they find offensive or hurtful. Among the most ludicrous concepts is "trigger warnings," where professors are expected to advise students in advance that a book or lesson might trigger a traumatic reaction. Targeted classics have included The Great Gatsby, in which a Rutgers student found “abusive and misogynist violence.” At law schools, student organizations have asked criminal law teachers to warn classes that a lesson on rape law might trigger traumatic memories, and some students want questions on rape law excised from tests, for fear it will upset them.
Supporters of such restrictions argue that they are somehow differentiating hate speech or disturbing speech from protected speech. But one of the great things about democracy is that it protects the right to speak even when the words spoken offend or hurt.
Practically speaking, this war on free speech does students a disservice by shielding them from the real world, where they won't be able to silence co-workers and bosses whose speech they dislike. If students aren't smart enough or mature enough to understand the values of free speech, it's up to institutions in the business of education to teach them.

Hate speech creates fear: Opposing view
Eleanor Hyun and Sarah Zimmerman 11:56 a.m. EDT September 16, 2015
University policy completely open to all speech allows students to cloak hate speech.
While open discourse is an important and essential part of the college learning environment, the University of Chicago’s stance on near-complete freedom of speech fails to acknowledge that the right to “freedom of speech” has increasingly been used to justify hate speech.
Unlike in the past, a First Amendment defense for speech is less likely to be used by student activists or minority groups on campus, and more likely to be invoked, for example, by students defending an event such as “Conquistadors and Aztec Hoes,” a fraternity party planned on our campus in 2012, then swiftly canceled after Latino students and their allies protested.These kinds of views and actions are blatantly racist and are meant to target and stereotype an entire group of people. Such views and actions are also the kind defended by the report and statement the university issued in January that unequivocally favors freedom of speech.
By failing to put limits on — or even mention — this type of behavior, the university’s report fails to protect freedom of expression for all members of its campus. Hate speech restricts freedom of expression by creating an environment so hostile to the targeted group that its members fear speaking out.
Although an offensively themed party might not seem like a serious infringement on First Amendment rights, it is just one of many incidents of racial bias on our campus, including ethnically offensive Halloween costumes, a homophobic and racist prank allegedly played on a black mail carrier, and a Facebook page that welcomed racism. All have created an unwelcoming environment for too many students.
Although it is difficult to define exactly what qualifies as hate speech, this is not a conversation the university should shy away from; it is one the university should encourage.
A policy completely open to all speech allows students to cloak hate speech under the guise of free speech. At a university that strives to promote open discourse and a diversity of perspectives, this should never be tolerated.
Eleanor Hyun, a University of Chicago senior, is editor in chief of The Chicago Maroon, the student newspaper. Sarah Zimmerman, a junior, is viewpoints editor.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#7

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 18, 2015 12:11 am

I agree with Biradar a 100%. If people do not come over here because their Dai is being called an idi-ot, then they shouldnt be coming here at all cause they are actually bigger idio-ts.

However, i disagree with him when he displays his hypocrisy while defending other idiotic ismaili concepts. Remember, the reason for the current and the past two Dais claim to fame is this weird concept of ismailism. Where did the dais learn to hunt? Wasnt it from one of these infallible ismaili imams?



Biradar
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#8

Unread post by Biradar » Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:29 pm

anajmi wrote:I agree with Biradar a 100%. If people do not come over here because their Dai is being called an idi-ot, then they shouldnt be coming here at all cause they are actually bigger idio-ts.

However, i disagree with him when he displays his hypocrisy while defending other idiotic ismaili concepts. Remember, the reason for the current and the past two Dais claim to fame is this weird concept of ismailism. Where did the dais learn to hunt? Wasnt it from one of these infallible ismaili imams?
Please don't misrepresent. I have opposed the hunting antics of the da'i, even opposing the writings of otherwise respected du'ats on this matter.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#9

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 18, 2015 4:01 pm

Yes you are. But you have just been opposing the symptoms. The underlying disease needs to be exposed and cured. (Been watching house m.d. lately).



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#10

Unread post by fayyaaz » Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:20 pm

All interpretations of Quran are allowed. If someone interprets the Quran to mean worshiping stone idols, other humans, the sun etc, then it is ok as long as he/she does not cause any physical harm to anyone. If a person chooses to suffer mental harm while following these interpretations, then he/she himself is to blame and a bystander could, if and only if he/she is asked, provide help and direct the victim to de-brainwashers.

In the 21st century, we ought to be enlightened and let people follow whatever religion their infantile minds conjure up. We all know there is no 'truth' in any of them. What with superstitions like angels and books descending from heavens etc., it is all nonsense anyway.



Biradar
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#11

Unread post by Biradar » Fri Sep 18, 2015 5:32 pm

anajmi wrote:Yes you are. But you have just been opposing the symptoms. The underlying disease needs to be exposed and cured. (Been watching house m.d. lately).
The underlying disease is not what you think it is. In reality, it is the vice of hubris. In essence, many of these du'ats from the time of the Imam, for example, thought they they knew ultimate reality, and wrote with such authority, and secured praise from even higher authorities (like the Imams), that centuries later people consider their opinions as truth. The reality is rather different. No Imam or da'i every could get even basic facts of science correct. Hence, their opinions on ethics and morality should be treated with suspicion. In contrast, the Qur'an does not speak in specifics and many of its "scientific" aspects are actually hints and symbols of something deeper, something not accessible to ordinary humans. Hence the need for a prophet and a book.

My suggestion is to be a bit more humble, and admit that one can be wrong. Also, admit that so-called "infallible" people are actually fully fallible, and make mistakes like the rest of us. Yet, humanity is making progress, and the next big progressive step will be understand the futility of hubris and adopt humility and skepticism. In this sense, I agree with fayyaaz. No interpretation is incorrect. All one can do is try and express ones views, and lets others do the same.



kimanumanu
Posts: 607
Joined: Wed Apr 09, 2014 2:16 pm

#12

Unread post by kimanumanu » Fri Sep 18, 2015 6:34 pm

It is heartening to see that in this thread out of all threads, the 3 of you, who have very opposing views, are actually having a civilized discussion. I wish that this becomes more of the norm so that the very thing Biradar bhai has raised in this thread will automatically disappear.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#13

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 18, 2015 7:33 pm

No interpretation is incorrect. All one can do is try and express ones views, and lets others do the same.
There is a major problem with your diagnosis. If no interpretation is incorrect then how can you expect muffy to admit that he is wrong?

There is a reason why you guys ended up with this guy. But hey, as long as he is not doing physical harm to anyone it is ok. A mind job is allowed.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#14

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 18, 2015 8:33 pm

And by the way, as i have said before, fayyaaz is a kothari lackey and probably recieving a percentage of the loot. That is the reason why he is ok with them being brainwashed but not de-brainwashed. The good thing is that people trying to de-brainwash these abde-idiots will just ignore him.

For those who have been following his postings, you might notice how he is always refining his argument like a liar. I mean a lawyer. He once wanted the abdes to believe in whatever they want, but now, he doesn't want them to be cured of their disease unless they explicitly want to be cured. It is as if slavery is ok as long as the slave wants to be a slave. Nobody should fight for the freedom of the slave. That is against his principles!!
We all know there is no 'truth' in any of them.
Actually, that is not true. Abde idiots have no idea that there is no 'truth' in anything that their Dai tells them. That is why they remain abde idiots.
What with superstitions like angels and books descending from heavens etc., it is all nonsense anyway.
So according to you the prophet and the ahle bayt were all conmen selling us nonsense right? That would mean that the only honest person coming out of that group was Yazid who knew the Quran was nonsense just like you do and treated it that way.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#15

Unread post by fayyaaz » Fri Sep 18, 2015 10:54 pm

anajmi wrote: If no interpretation is incorrect then how can you expect muffy to admit that he is wrong?

:D :D

You have to be insane to expect an insane person to admit his insanity. If Muffy believes/interpretes that he is God, Ilahul Ard, he is clearly insane. And anajmi, wanting him to admit to his insanity is clearly himself INSANE. Lo, insane anajmi. :lol: How do you like that :?:



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#16

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:17 pm

Ah so the guy claiming that no interpretation is incorrect is the biggest idiot of them all right?? Cause only an idiot would consider muffy's insane interpretation to be not incorrect, correct? How insane is that? :wink:



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#17

Unread post by fayyaaz » Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:21 pm

anajmi wrote:And by the way, as i have said before, fayyaaz is a kothari lackey and probably recieving a percentage of the loot.

Hey, what the hell? It puts food on my table. What is wrong with that? No one has to pay the Kothar. If they do, it is their choice, whether they like it or not.

It is as if slavery is ok as long as the slave wants to be a slave. Nobody should fight for the freedom of the slave. That is against his principles!!

Slavery is OK in Islam. It is not OK for modern man. If slave wants to remain a slave , then it is ok. If a slave wants your help in freeing him, then you should help him. It is always slaves who have taken the lead in ending slavery.

What with superstitions like angels and books descending from heavens etc., it is all nonsense anyway.
So according to you the prophet and the ahle bayt were all conmen selling us nonsense right? That would mean that the only honest person coming out of that group was Yazid who knew the Quran was nonsense just like you do and treated it that way.

Prophet and ahlebayt sincerely believed in what they preached. If they did not and yet forced those beliefs on others, then they would be conmen. Obviously they were not conmen.

Yazid did believe that Quran was nonsense. But he went too far and harmed ahlebayt because of that belief. That is just not being very nice. Not being very nice at all. Is that why you love Yazid so much? You seem to take after him as you are never nice to anyone on this forum. :lol: :lol:
Remember my position, you ghel saffo. As long as your beliefs do not harm anyone, you are welcome to have them.
Last edited by fayyaaz on Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:42 pm, edited 4 times in total.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#18

Unread post by fayyaaz » Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:26 pm

anajmi wrote:Ah so the guy claiming that no interpretation is incorrect is the biggest idiot of them all right?? Cause only an idiot would consider muffy's insane interpretation to be not incorrect, correct? How insane is that? :wink:
I am not concerned with whether an interpretation is correct or incorrect. Only that one has the right to that interpretation as long as it does not harm others.
Last edited by fayyaaz on Fri Sep 18, 2015 11:44 pm, edited 3 times in total.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#19

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Sep 19, 2015 11:30 am

Yazid did believe that Quran was nonsense. But he went too far and harmed ahlebayt because of that belief.
Actually if Hussain had said nothing, kept quiet and followed your excellent philosophy, no one would've been harmed.

What the prophet taught led to a great deal of physical harm to a great deal of people. Infact it still is. He didnt just keep his beliefs to himself. He wanted others to have the same belief.
I am not concerned with whether an interpretation is correct or incorrect. Only that one has the right to that interpretation as long as it does not harm others.
Well muffy's interpretation has been harming the entire community. My beloved qaid chor got beaten by the Saudi police ergo muffy's interpretation led to physical harm. So he is not allowed to have his interpretation.

And by the way, i am simply following my own interpretation and havent caused any physical harm to anyone. So thanks for your support.



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#20

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Sep 19, 2015 11:45 am

And according to my interpretation, without causing any physical harm, I need to show the errors of muffy's interpretation, without causing any physical harm, and show the abde idiots, without causing any physical harm, how muffy has been conning them out of their hard earned money, without causing any physical harm, and how he is teaching them that which is not Islam but idol worship, without causing any physical harm and that they should kick him and his lackeys to the curb, without causing any physical harm and stop feeding his delusions of grandeur, without causing any physical harm, and if they don't, they will suffer tremendous physical harm in the hereafter, even without causing any physical harm.



fayyaaz
Posts: 528
Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 5:40 pm

#21

Unread post by fayyaaz » Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:03 pm

anajmi wrote: Actually if Hussain had said nothing, kept quiet and followed your excellent philosophy, no one would've been harmed.

Hussain had every right to express his teachings. He did not harm anyone by doing that. I have never suggested that you keep quiet about your beliefs. Why support someone like Yazid, who harms others for holding and speaking their views?

What the prophet taught led to a great deal of physical harm to a great deal of people. Infact it still is. He didnt just keep his beliefs to himself. He wanted others to have the same belief.

Following the Prophet does not harm anyone. Prophet's followers were defending themselves for being attacked because of their beliefs. Husain's right to preach to his followers was blocked by Yazid. Even then, Husain agreed to back away without war. But your hero had other ideas.
I am not concerned with whether an interpretation is correct or incorrect. Only that one has the right to that interpretation as long as it does not harm others.
Well muffy's interpretation has been harming the entire community. My beloved qaid chor got beaten by the Saudi police ergo muffy's interpretation led to physical harm. So he is not allowed to have his interpretation.

I agree that Muffy's interpretation is harming the community. But then they are being happy being harmed. If someone from the community comes to you seeking help on how to avoid being harmed, please help him without harming the rest of the community. You never know, everyone in the community will begin to follow you with the example you set and the community will become free from harm. :D



anajmi
Posts: 13399
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

#22

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Sep 19, 2015 12:09 pm

Hussain had every right to express his teachings. He did not harm anyone by doing that. I have never suggested that you keep quiet about your beliefs.
Excellent, so now that I have your vote, I am going to continue doing what I have been doing, without causing any physical harm. This discussion was really beneficial. Thanks for participating. :wink:



Biradar
Posts: 819
Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 9:13 pm

#23

Unread post by Biradar » Sat Sep 19, 2015 6:39 pm

Just a clarification: I do not believe that all interpretations of the Qu'ran are correct. I may not have been clear in my previous post. There are certain interpretations which are certainly incorrect. For example, no sane person can claim that they interpret the Qur'anic verses about Jesus to mean that he was the Son of God. My general point is that the Qur'an is not very specific about many things. In such situations, it is best to be open minded and allow, and in fact encourage, variety of thoughts and beliefs.

Also, I do not agree with fayyaaz's "no harm principle". It is true that simply holding absurd beliefs is not in itself a bad thing. However, the problem comes about from fanaticism and forcing people to adopt your beliefs, often with threats of social boycott, or even death. Hence, Dawedar Mr. Muffy is certainly doing great harm, by forcing a certain fanatical view of Islam on his followers. Fayyaaz is wrong to claim that people are "happy" about it. Most people are not. However, no one in their right mind will every say anything openly, as it is a very big risk. Hence, people put on a brave face and chug along, even though internally they may not agree. The great danger is that over a period of time his Abdes will think that his fanatical ideas are actually correct, and won't be bothered by the extremism. This is very, very harmful and we must counter it.

What we are seeing among the Bohras is a runaway "praise inflation". Basically, once you call the da'i Sun Among Dua'ts, to beat him you have think of something more extreme. So, one then invents "Panjataan ni shaan aap ni peshani maa che". Now, the next fanatic must think of something even more extreme. So on and so forth. Hence, we see the da'i being elevated to the ultimate position of Raab in this world. The great crime of SMB was that he was unable to stop this, and perhaps even secretly encouraged it. Now, we are stuck with a bunch of screeching baboons who go wild on just getting a glance of their [DELETED] Leader. It is a very sad state of affairs, and undoing it is not easy. However, deflating the lovely picture which Abdes paint of More-la Muffy is a first step.

Finally: even though I mostly disagree with Anajmi, I prefer him to fools like Al Noor.



Shk Mohammed Yamani
Posts: 192
Joined: Sat May 21, 2016 1:13 pm

#24

Unread post by Shk Mohammed Yamani » Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:30 am

In my opinion, Anajmi is admin as hes the one who keeps deleting posts if he doesn't agree with anyone writing stuffs about THE MAGNIFICENT 4, the so called KQ clan