The Administration probably seems to hold a brief either from AZ or from the family members and that’s why his purported decision to delete the post inconsiderately without any forethought or consultation with the general membership etc. The Forum should give all the good, bad and ugly views and news of the Kotharis or Progressives, however distasteful – without any fear or favour and to make the Forum more independent and unbiased.
My following posting related to a member of a UK progressive family and related to the subject on hand – the news of an alleged corruption by a progressive, if not in progressive! The following proves that the person is or was a member of the UK progressive bohri jamaat in the recent past – and hence the relevance to the thread.
http://dawoodi-bohras.com/uploads/news/id246/azad36.pdf
http://dawoodi-bohras.com/uploads/news/ ... rt2004.pdf
http://dawoodi-bohras.com/news/76/97/Da ... l_article/
http://www.dawoodi-bohras.org.uk/servepage.asp?page=50
http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cac ... QNsZVmVQbQ
It relates to an ongoing trial in the United Kingdom. The following were the URL references give, without attributing or assigning any blame or guilt: As explained in my posting, the person or persons charged is NOT guilty until proven or adjudged so by a law court. These are all in the public domain and hence do not breach any protocol, privacy or personal concerns; as long as they are not libelous or slanderous or unfounded. They may be distasteful to some who have a vested interest in the issue, but the issue is before the western Law Courts and NOT so-called kangaroo courts.
If perchance the Administration in its judgement reckons that this item does not belong here, he can with the membership’s consent transfer it to the “Here and Now” or “Media Churnings: looking beyond the News” part of the Public Forum – but NOT selectively pick and choose to delete the items which are odious to the people having a conflict of interest etc.
This is, with due respect, NOT a spam and as can now been seen, there was no mocking, there was a linkage and makes eminence sense to at least those who have some semblance or iota of sense - although alas common sense is not so common.!
(Post edited due to personal nature of its content - Admin)
Court case
-
Al Zulfiqar
- Posts: 4618
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:01 am
Re: Corruption in progressive
Admin,mburhan wrote: AZ does not seem to know his backside orifice from the hole in the ground; and this is being generous to this ignorant and or illiterate person, to say the least.
The Administration probably seems to hold a brief either from AZ or from the family members
!
are you going to allow such shockingly indecent and vulgar language and personal attacks on this forum?? this is absolutely beyond tolerable. now he has gone on to accuse this forum of bias and nepotism.!!
Re: Court case
mburhan,
This case relates to an individual who happens to be progressive, it does not relate to progressive jamaat or organization nor does it involve monies that belong to reformists etc. and as such this topic does not belong to these forums. At any give time many Bohra individuals on either side of the divide are involved in alleged corruption cases, it would be unethical and self-righteous to report these cases here. Our question is, what is your motive in highlighting this issue here?
This case relates to an individual who happens to be progressive, it does not relate to progressive jamaat or organization nor does it involve monies that belong to reformists etc. and as such this topic does not belong to these forums. At any give time many Bohra individuals on either side of the divide are involved in alleged corruption cases, it would be unethical and self-righteous to report these cases here. Our question is, what is your motive in highlighting this issue here?
-
Al Zulfiqar
- Posts: 4618
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:01 am
Re: Court case
Admin,
i see that you have avoided reprimanding him for the vulagrities that he has used against me. i am asking you once again, are you going to allow this forum to be sullied by such low class indivduals who can stoop to being so foul mouthed??
i see that you have avoided reprimanding him for the vulagrities that he has used against me. i am asking you once again, are you going to allow this forum to be sullied by such low class indivduals who can stoop to being so foul mouthed??
Re: Court case
Al Zulfiqar,
We've deleted the offensive reference to you. If it is repeated we'll accordingly take further action.
We've deleted the offensive reference to you. If it is repeated we'll accordingly take further action.
Re: Court case
Admin:
With due respect, to respond to your query/question: "...what is your motive in highlighting this issue here?"
Has the Forum changed its policy that a person should only post the topics or replies to such topics only if a contributor divulges or declares the motives.? If so, it doesn't seem that this policy is applied consistently!!
I know, it is a protcol in certain Criminal Jurisdictions to find motive to bring forth the case to the Judge for prosecution; however, I do not know whether this is also a must or a protocol in case of the such bloggish journalistic endeavours as well.
As to your contention or edict to AZ that " If it is repeated we'll accordingly take further action.", I hope this applies to AZ as well, as he is the first one who started shelling and yelling the "foul-mouthed" expletives, such as "crap" and "low-class individuals" etc. - an excellent example of the "pot calling the kettle black". Many more examples of such vulgarities can also be found on AZ's other various postings, I suppose!
Sorry, AZ if I called you a black!! No offence intended or meant.
With due respect, to respond to your query/question: "...what is your motive in highlighting this issue here?"
Has the Forum changed its policy that a person should only post the topics or replies to such topics only if a contributor divulges or declares the motives.? If so, it doesn't seem that this policy is applied consistently!!
I know, it is a protcol in certain Criminal Jurisdictions to find motive to bring forth the case to the Judge for prosecution; however, I do not know whether this is also a must or a protocol in case of the such bloggish journalistic endeavours as well.
As to your contention or edict to AZ that " If it is repeated we'll accordingly take further action.", I hope this applies to AZ as well, as he is the first one who started shelling and yelling the "foul-mouthed" expletives, such as "crap" and "low-class individuals" etc. - an excellent example of the "pot calling the kettle black". Many more examples of such vulgarities can also be found on AZ's other various postings, I suppose!
Sorry, AZ if I called you a black!! No offence intended or meant.
Re: Court case
mburhan,
We ask for the motive because the issue you insist on raising here concerns an individual and as far as the reform movement is concerned it is a private matter. We do not see the point of highlight this "private matter" on the forum which is devoted to discussing bohra reform and related issues. As we said before, this issue has nothing to with reforms nor does this alleged fraud relates to funds of bohras or reformists. Unless you can give us a cogent reason why this topic should be here, we will be constrained to delete it.
We ask for the motive because the issue you insist on raising here concerns an individual and as far as the reform movement is concerned it is a private matter. We do not see the point of highlight this "private matter" on the forum which is devoted to discussing bohra reform and related issues. As we said before, this issue has nothing to with reforms nor does this alleged fraud relates to funds of bohras or reformists. Unless you can give us a cogent reason why this topic should be here, we will be constrained to delete it.
Re: Court case
Admin:
Thanks
With due respect:
If you reckon this topic does not relate to bohra reform and related issue, can someone explain why some of the following issues raised on this Public Forum in the recent past passes meet the test as well and not being deleted?
Media Churnings:
America vs. The Narrative-By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Decagonal and Quasi-Crystalline Tilings in Medieval Islamic
World's Largest Prison still has Doors sealed shut
The Plunder of Iraq's Oil.
Swine Narendra Modi diagnosed with flu
Ostrov (Island)
Mohammed Azharuddin.-Like Something Calm And Azure
Why I threw the shoe.
Mock Executions
The Daughter Deficit
Draconian Law in Afghanistan for benefit of Shias.
Light falls on light, in symbolic Mosque of Rome
Jinnah was 'demonised' by India: Jaswant
Drug Menace -- Who's Responsible, Taliban or CIA ?
There are similar issues (having no connections or relevance to bohra reforms or related issues) discussed on "Here and Now" which does not pass the litmus test either.
What's good for the goose is also good for the gander!!
Thanks
With due respect:
If you reckon this topic does not relate to bohra reform and related issue, can someone explain why some of the following issues raised on this Public Forum in the recent past passes meet the test as well and not being deleted?
Media Churnings:
America vs. The Narrative-By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
Decagonal and Quasi-Crystalline Tilings in Medieval Islamic
World's Largest Prison still has Doors sealed shut
The Plunder of Iraq's Oil.
Swine Narendra Modi diagnosed with flu
Ostrov (Island)
Mohammed Azharuddin.-Like Something Calm And Azure
Why I threw the shoe.
Mock Executions
The Daughter Deficit
Draconian Law in Afghanistan for benefit of Shias.
Light falls on light, in symbolic Mosque of Rome
Jinnah was 'demonised' by India: Jaswant
Drug Menace -- Who's Responsible, Taliban or CIA ?
There are similar issues (having no connections or relevance to bohra reforms or related issues) discussed on "Here and Now" which does not pass the litmus test either.
What's good for the goose is also good for the gander!!
Re: Court case
mburhan,
Now you are being daft. Do not latch on to our words, try to understand the spirit. The list you've produced obviously do not concern the reform or bohra issues. But pls read the forum blurb in which they appear. These forums discuss more than bohra issues - religion, politics, philosophy and a lot more. But in every case the topics and issues are of larger public interest.The people and issues listed are about topical issues and public figures and as such are of larger public concern and interest. These are not private matter of private individuals. What you're doing is trying to make a public case of a private matter. This we feel is unethical and unfair.
Now you are being daft. Do not latch on to our words, try to understand the spirit. The list you've produced obviously do not concern the reform or bohra issues. But pls read the forum blurb in which they appear. These forums discuss more than bohra issues - religion, politics, philosophy and a lot more. But in every case the topics and issues are of larger public interest.The people and issues listed are about topical issues and public figures and as such are of larger public concern and interest. These are not private matter of private individuals. What you're doing is trying to make a public case of a private matter. This we feel is unethical and unfair.
Re: Court case
Admin
I have been called worse by better people.
Calling me daft is a matter of opinion. Mind over matter. I don't mind and you don't matter.
The issue I discussed "are of larger public concern and interest" and that's why they were on the BBC News, Serious Fraud Office of the U.K. and Birmingham UK newspapers etc. I raised it without assigning any blame etc., as it relates to a member of the UK Progressive bohra group -a public figure of interest - a solicitor!
The issue discussed headed "Corruption in progressive" (Hatim Rani) on the Forum, according to S. Insaf was:
"The amount stolen was for Centre for study of Society and Secularism, which works for the communal harmony and it has nothing to do with the voluntary donations received for the cause of Bohra reform".
It was supposedly a personal matter between Dr. Engineer and his Society and also are about topical issues and public figures and as such are of larger public concern and interest. However presumably being of "of larger public public concern and interest", the Bombay Samachar published it.
This is a second spirited discussion between us. The first being NOT publicizing the sad demise of Mr. Husseinbhai Hamdani, when you defended the issue by saying: "that this site and the message board are not directly related to APDBO and as such is not obliged to report on it activities or make announcements on its behalf."; and "not all members of APDBP visit the site. Although I understand Admin. is a member in good standing of APDBO.
On 16, 2008 at 4.45pm, you the Admin. wrote to me:
"We do not wish to argue with you. We repeat, this site does not concern itself with APDBO, its activities and its politics or, for that matter, with the activities and politics of any other reformist jamaat. If anybody wants to report and discuss issues pertaining to them, they are welcome to do so here."
When AZ came to my defence, you wrote:
"It's simple, if people send us the news/contribution we'll publish it. And this forum is always available for people to use at any time without our intervention. Yes, reformists should be more organized and do this and do that... but all this is academic. Let us focus on what each of us can do. And that's all that matters."
Sorry if I "latched" to your own words again, but they are again your words not mine. Sorry, the truth hurts but always seem to triumph in the end - whether one likes it or bends it to his her benefit or intentions - however honourable or cute!
I have been called worse by better people.
Calling me daft is a matter of opinion. Mind over matter. I don't mind and you don't matter.
The issue I discussed "are of larger public concern and interest" and that's why they were on the BBC News, Serious Fraud Office of the U.K. and Birmingham UK newspapers etc. I raised it without assigning any blame etc., as it relates to a member of the UK Progressive bohra group -a public figure of interest - a solicitor!
The issue discussed headed "Corruption in progressive" (Hatim Rani) on the Forum, according to S. Insaf was:
"The amount stolen was for Centre for study of Society and Secularism, which works for the communal harmony and it has nothing to do with the voluntary donations received for the cause of Bohra reform".
It was supposedly a personal matter between Dr. Engineer and his Society and also are about topical issues and public figures and as such are of larger public concern and interest. However presumably being of "of larger public public concern and interest", the Bombay Samachar published it.
This is a second spirited discussion between us. The first being NOT publicizing the sad demise of Mr. Husseinbhai Hamdani, when you defended the issue by saying: "that this site and the message board are not directly related to APDBO and as such is not obliged to report on it activities or make announcements on its behalf."; and "not all members of APDBP visit the site. Although I understand Admin. is a member in good standing of APDBO.
On 16, 2008 at 4.45pm, you the Admin. wrote to me:
"We do not wish to argue with you. We repeat, this site does not concern itself with APDBO, its activities and its politics or, for that matter, with the activities and politics of any other reformist jamaat. If anybody wants to report and discuss issues pertaining to them, they are welcome to do so here."
When AZ came to my defence, you wrote:
"It's simple, if people send us the news/contribution we'll publish it. And this forum is always available for people to use at any time without our intervention. Yes, reformists should be more organized and do this and do that... but all this is academic. Let us focus on what each of us can do. And that's all that matters."
Sorry if I "latched" to your own words again, but they are again your words not mine. Sorry, the truth hurts but always seem to triumph in the end - whether one likes it or bends it to his her benefit or intentions - however honourable or cute!
Re: Court case
mburhan,
You're protesting too much and trying too hard. We remain unconvinced, and the lack of interest from other members on this forum shows that nobody cares. We request you to stop turning your personal agenda into a public issue. Hope you understand. Thank you.
You're protesting too much and trying too hard. We remain unconvinced, and the lack of interest from other members on this forum shows that nobody cares. We request you to stop turning your personal agenda into a public issue. Hope you understand. Thank you.
Re: Court case
MBurhan
On any given day, there a probably hundreds of such "larger public concern and interest" pieces of news. I don't see any relevance to this forum other than gossip.
Admin - I agree with your comments.
The issue I discussed "are of larger public concern and interest" and that's why they were on the BBC News, Serious Fraud Office of the U.K. and Birmingham UK newspapers etc. I raised it without assigning any blame etc., as it relates to a member of the UK Progressive bohra group -a public figure of interest - a solicitor!
On any given day, there a probably hundreds of such "larger public concern and interest" pieces of news. I don't see any relevance to this forum other than gossip.
Admin - I agree with your comments.