Shoaib Malik @ Presentation
Master Chief
it."
Kunal
"Master Chief" <suse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> it."
>
Shoaib Malik married a muslim girl from Hyderabad, India
alalagandan
wrote:
So , He thanks India as well.
Kunal
"alalagandan" <al...@gan.dan> wrote in message
news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
Pakistan management should tell the players not to talk religion in sports
JayP
> "alalagandan" <a...@gan.dan> wrote in message
>
> news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:09:05 -0700, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>"Master Chief" <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> >>> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> >>> it."
>
> >>Shoaib Malik married a muslim girl from Hyderabad, India
>
> > So , He thanks India as well.
>
> Pakistan management should tell the players not to talk religion in sports
I agree. His statement almost gave the impression that he believed it
was a matchup between the muslims and non-muslims and he was
apologizing for letting the muslims down.
Wasn't Inzi criticized for the same?
Jack of all trades
"alalagandan" <al...@gan.dan> wrote in message
news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
I was thinking WTF? Is that what it is? muslims vs infidels?
J
Geico Caveman
> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> it."
At first I thought you were kidding. Then I read the final part of cricinfo
commentary again and there it is, sticking out like a rotten sore thumb :
"First of all I'd like to thank people back home and the Muslims around the
world. We gave our 100%," he says.
I do not think much of Pakistan, but this goes beyond even the low standards
they have established over the years.
If Pakistan had won, would Mr. Malik have said "We won a jihad for Muslims
everywhere" ?, followed by some more bullshit about the alleged superiority
of their faith.
Imagine if Roger Federer prefaced his remarks after a final (ones he usually
wins) as his excellent play being an effort for Christians everywhere, or
if Dhoni said today that India's victory today was a blow for Hindus and
Sikhs everywhere ? It would set off protests all over the world with calls
from Indian socialists/commies, Western liberals and Muslims everywhere, to
penalize the person mouthing that bullshit in some way.
This is an insult not only to non-Muslims all over the world, but also to
Indian Muslims, more prominent ones being Yusuf and Irfan Pathan, who
helped defeat Mr. Malik's Islamist paradise (read hellhole) and Shah Rukh
Khan (I do not much care for his movies, but he showed with his cheering of
every Paki wicket where his heart lies today).
Most of us realize that Pakistan was founded by a set of religious zealots
who set off the worst genocide and ethnic cleansing in modern Indian
history, but I think these kind of remarks should perhaps wake up the
head-in-the-sand ostriches everywhere as well.
Alex M
"Master Chief" <suse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> it."
>
What a fucking half dick :(
Pace Bowler
Beautifully said !
Cric8Fan
This idiot thinks that Muslims of India, England, South Africa and
Australia were supporting Pakistani team? What kind of loser is he...
Not only this but before the match, he had given the statement that
since the tournament is being played in holy month of Ramzaan, he
hopes Pakistan would win...
I liked the way Pakistan played their Cricket throughout the
tournament but I was completely disappointed by such attitude.
Shame on you Shoib!
Mohan
> Master Chief wrote:
>
>> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
>> it."
>
> At first I thought you were kidding. Then I read the final part of cricinfo
> commentary again and there it is, sticking out like a rotten sore thumb :
>
> "First of all I'd like to thank people back home and the Muslims around the
> world. We gave our 100%," he says.
>
> I do not think much of Pakistan, but this goes beyond even the low standards
> they have established over the years.
I don't know why you are surprised. This is not the first time a
Pakistan captain said that. Inzi had also once thanked muslims all over
the world for their support or something like that. I wish Shastri had
reminded Malik that there are more muslims in India than in Pakistan and
not all of them would be supporting Pakistan.
Mohan
LKM
He must have been told by Pakistani authority to make this kinda
stupid, and a real inflammatory statement.
Master Chief
I also felt that Shastri should have said something like that. He may
have been surprised to hear that too and chose to ignore that to avoid
any controversy.
Master Chief
> Not only this but before the match, he had given the statement that
> since the tournament is being played in holy month of Ramzaan, he
> hopes Pakistan would win...
Maybe should not have gone for the water bottle seconds after
returning to the dugout then.
CricketLeague
"Geico Caveman" <spammers...@spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:fd8ppv$r7o$1...@aioe.org...
Moron,
There is nothing new in pak players invoking religion in
sports..........They have been doing it for decades in every match they
played..........
You think this small incident will wake up people ?
The solution to this Pak players problem is Pak management giving them
strict warning and setting code that they should NOT talk about religion in
any sports comments......
sdavmor
Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
etc., speeches.
Based only on reading the cricinfo text, IMO Mr. Malik was doing two
things:
(1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
(2) acknowledging the fact that his team is predominantly (almost all
IIRC) Muslim in faith.
Put the two things together and (for better or worse) the pakistan
captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
say a few words that make us grimace.
You and other posters here clearly have a different perspective, but I
think you're investing Mr. Malik's words with far more historical weight
(and intentional venom) than his acknowledgment of personal and
collective faith warrants.
As with all things that cause major disagreement on usenet, YMMV.
--
Cheers,
SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
Systems Theory internet music project links:
official site <www.systemstheory.net>
MySpace MP3s <www.myspace.com/systemstheory>
CDBaby <www.cdbaby.com/systemstheory>
"Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
"Codetalkers" CD coming very soon
NP: nothing
CricketLeague
"Mohan" <moha...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:fd8s1b$1ln$1...@aioe.org...
It is NOT Ravi Shastri's responsibility to ENLIGHTEN Shoaib Malik........
arahim
You are right.
> NP: nothing- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Master Chief
> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech,
Nope. That is more like "This was Allah's wish" by Inzy. If Tony Dungy
had said that he was dedicating the victory to all the Christians who
supported the Colts, then you can compare.
> Based only on reading the cricinfo text, IMO Mr. Malik was doing two
> things:
>
> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
Can you imagine the mess we will be in if Ricky Ponting/Collingwood
start thanking all "whites" after beating WI/India/Pak?
> (2) acknowledging the fact that his team is predominantly (almost all
> IIRC) Muslim in faith.
And assuming that all muslims were supporting him. There was one
famous muslim, arguably the most famous muslim in India-Pak, who was
cheering for every Pak wicket and hugged every Indian player after the
victory.
> Put the two things together and (for better or worse) the pakistan
> captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
> crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
> icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
> around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
> should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
> say a few words that make us grimace.
Again, what would your reaction be if WI captain thanks all blacks
after beating SA?
CricketLeague
"sdavmor" <sda...@fakeemailaddy.com> wrote in message
news:_aOdnS1nXPAPYWrb...@iswest.net...
Finally one good comment from sdavmor........Well done.....though I still
think Paks management should tell their players to cut down on religion talk
in sports.....
To all the rest of the clowns who are attacking Shoaib Mallik as if only
muslims do it.......
Western pedophile priests and nuns went to Srilanka, India and Indonesia for
example and told the victims of tsunami that their loved ones died because
they believed in devil, evil pagan religions namely Hinduism, Buddhisma and
Islam.............As a matter of fact these western xtain fanatics told the
gujarat indian earth quake victims the same back in the late 90s.....
Shoaibs comments are NO worse than what these Xtian lunatics and religious
fanatics did...........
Mohan
>
> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> etc., speeches.
>
> Based only on reading the cricinfo text, IMO Mr. Malik was doing two
> things:
>
> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
Except that vast majority of Muslims around the world - Arabs,
Indonesians, Afghans etc. - don't care for cricket. The only ones who do
care for cricket are the Muslims in Pakistan, India, Bangladesh plus the
expats from those countries. Assuming Indians were supporting the Indian
team, that makes only 2/3rds of the Muslims watching this match were
supporting Pakistan at best. To specifically thank/apologise to "Muslims
all over the world" when the team that has beaten you has 2 Muslims and
one of them was the Man of the Match and as Master Chief said the most
famous Muslim in the Indian subcontinent today (even in Pakistan) was
clearly cheering for India in the stands, it is insensitive at best. But
I think it was far worse than just lacking sensitivity. No don't even
try to compare it with the usual "thank the Lord" kind of post-match
statement.
Mohan
CricketLeague
"Pace Bowler" <paceb...@nospam.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46F7EDF9...@nospam.gmail.com...
As if Shoiabs and Islam's counterparts in Xtianity are any better.........
Asif Zaidi
> Shoaib Malik spoiled the image of Pakistan with this statement.
>
> This idiot thinks that Muslims of India, England, South Africa and
> Australia were supporting Pakistani team? What kind of loser is he...
>
Yes and I am from India.
Though I am glad that Irfan Pathan and Y Pathan did well.
CricketLeague
> On Sep 24, 2:06 pm, sdavmor <sdav...@fakeemailaddy.com> wrote:
>> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
>> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
>> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
>> speech,
>
> Nope. That is more like "This was Allah's wish" by Inzy. If Tony Dungy
> had said that he was dedicating the victory to all the Christians who
> supported the Colts, then you can compare.
Ok, Shoaib went a little farther and addressed all muslims...........He
acted like an undeducated religious fanatic dick but he is NO worse than the
xtian fanatics in the west......
Didnt bush talk about CRUSADES the moment US was hit on 911 ?
Atleast in this case, Shoaib Malik is not a leader of a nation like
dubya.....
>
>> Based only on reading the cricinfo text, IMO Mr. Malik was doing two
>> things:
>>
>> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
>> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
>> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
>> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
>> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for
>> Pakistan.
>
>
> Can you imagine the mess we will be in if Ricky Ponting/Collingwood
> start thanking all "whites" after beating WI/India/Pak?
Do you know the difference between RACE and RELIGION ?
Spoken like a TYPICAL frigging white dick sucker........
>
>> (2) acknowledging the fact that his team is predominantly (almost all
>> IIRC) Muslim in faith.
>
> And assuming that all muslims were supporting him. There was one
> famous muslim, arguably the most famous muslim in India-Pak, who was
> cheering for every Pak wicket and hugged every Indian player after the
> victory.
>
>
>> Put the two things together and (for better or worse) the pakistan
>> captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
>> crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
>> icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
>> around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
>> should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
>> say a few words that make us grimace.
>
> Again, what would your reaction be if WI captain thanks all blacks
> after beating SA?
>
You dont know the difference between RACE and RELIGION and you complain
about others' POOR ENGLISH.......
Asif Zaidi
problem. It is only when Muslims do.
Talk about having double standards and inferiority complex.
Master Chief
> Because an 'amreekan' had mixed religion with sports, it is not a
> problem. It is only when Muslims do.
> Talk about having double standards and inferiority complex.
>
What inferiority complex?
Geico Caveman
>
> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> etc., speeches.
>
The Super Bowl is mostly followed in the US and about 90%+ of US population
is Christian, who would take such statements to be indicative of some form
of humility.
The religious angle would not much enter such a stupid comment. If it did,
outfits like Fox news etc. would make short work of any people objecting to
such comments (a push to make mandatory celebrations of Christmas and
Nativity scenes in taxpayer funded public schools, are a big issue for some
of these people - comments like the one you refer to, are a small matter by
comparison).
Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers alone)
a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse following. A
following, in which such comments would be seen as borderline hate speech.
> Based only on reading the cricinfo text, IMO Mr. Malik was doing two
> things:
>
> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
>
True.
> (2) acknowledging the fact that his team is predominantly (almost all
> IIRC) Muslim in faith.
Wasn't Ponting's Australian team that won the ODI WC earlier this year, all
Christian ?
Would you have similarly defended any similar hypothetical allusions by
him ? I might be wrong, but I cannot imagine you doing that (nor Ponting
actually doing something so crass either).
Come off it, sdavmor. You are remarkably fair (I am purposely not using the
word "even-handed" as it has been redefined out of existence in today's
media.) in all your comments elsewhere. Why this blind spot ?
>
> You and other posters here clearly have a different perspective, but I
> think you're investing Mr. Malik's words with far more historical weight
> (and intentional venom) than his acknowledgment of personal and
> collective faith warrants.
I will not comment on certain effects of history learning in British schools
today - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6563429.stm . Who
knows what else has been scrubbed in this misguided rush to not offend
certain classes of the population feared for their rabble rousing
potential ?
>
> As with all things that cause major disagreement on usenet, YMMV.
True enough.
Kunal
"Master Chief" <suse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1190658199.0...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Master chief friend,
I am not experienced in religion, nationality, race, caste systems. I agree
every one here is smarter than me but are you not mixing skin color and
religion
Please do not abuze me like Andrew
arahim
So thanking your countryman would be an act of war against the rest of
the world?
Master Chief
I don't think you understand what is being discussed. If Malik had
said that he is thankful to all Pakistanis for their support and even
if he had thanked all the supporters of Pakistani team all over the
world, there would have been no negative discussion. Some may even
have praised Malik for doing that.
Now imagine someone saying that he thanked all people around the world
who have the same skin color. What Malik said was something like that.
sdavmor already mentioned that people have their biases like race,
creed so what Malik said is reasonable but many feel that it was
uncomfortable to hear at the least.
Lastly, there is no need for a violent extrapolation to "act of war".
Nobody was saying that.
arahim
> On Sep 24, 3:39 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 24, 11:23 am, Master Chief <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Again, what would your reaction be if WI captain thanks all blacks
> > > after beating SA?
>
> > So thanking your countryman would be an act of war against the rest of
> > the world?
>
> I don't think you understand what is being discussed. If Malik had
> said that he is thankful to all Pakistanis for their support and even
> if he had thanked all the supporters of Pakistani team all over the
> world, there would have been no negative discussion. Some may even
> have praised Malik for doing that.
>
Why? Why would it be ok to assume "all" Pakistanis?
> Now imagine someone saying that he thanked all people around the world
> who have the same skin color. What Malik said was something like that.
> sdavmor already mentioned that people have their biases like race,
> creed so what Malik said is reasonable but many feel that it was
> uncomfortable to hear at the least.
>
cricketleague has addressed that.
> Lastly, there is no need for a violent extrapolation to "act of war".
> Nobody was saying that.
It was to make a point. But tell me what is being suggested?
outsourci...@yahoo.com
> "alalagandan" <a...@gan.dan> wrote in message
>
> news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
>
> > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:09:05 -0700, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com>
> > wrote:
>
> >>"Master Chief" <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> >>> it."
>
>
> > So , He thanks India as well.
>
> Pakistan management should tell the players not to talk religion in sports
While I believe its okay to thank God while accepting a prize, it
should not become a situation about talking about individual
religions. Like I thank all Hindus, or I thank all Christians or I
thank all muslims, buddhists etc.
arahim
>
Why are you being callous to athiests?
Rodney
> Master Chief wrote:
>> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
>> it."
> commentary again and there it is, sticking out like a rotten sore thumb :
> "First of all I'd like to thank people back home and the Muslims around the
> world. We gave our 100%," he says.
> I do not think much of Pakistan, but this goes beyond even the low standards
> they have established over the years.
> If Pakistan had won, would Mr. Malik have said "We won a jihad for Muslims
> of their faith.
> Imagine if Roger Federer prefaced his remarks after a final (ones he usually
> wins) as his excellent play being an effort for Christians everywhere, or
> if Dhoni said today that India's victory today was a blow for Hindus and
> Sikhs everywhere ? It would set off protests all over the world with calls
> from Indian socialists/commies, Western liberals and Muslims everywhere, to
> penalize the person mouthing that bullshit in some way.
> This is an insult not only to non-Muslims all over the world, but also to
> Indian Muslims, more prominent ones being Yusuf and Irfan Pathan, who
> helped defeat Mr. Malik's Islamist paradise (read hellhole) and Shah Rukh
> Khan (I do not much care for his movies, but he showed with his cheering of
> every Paki wicket where his heart lies today).
> Most of us realize that Pakistan was founded by a set of religious zealots
> who set off the worst genocide and ethnic cleansing in modern Indian
> history, but I think these kind of remarks should perhaps wake up the
> head-in-the-sand ostriches everywhere as well.
The floodgates, good RSCers, are now officially open. (Let me lay down,
though, for the record, the fact that [being the complaisant,
compassionate, comradely, considerate feller that I am] my personal
opinion is that Shoaib's remarks were just poorly worded. Jonty scored
points for the Christians all the time.)
--
Cheers,
Rodney Ulyate
"Ah wor thinkin' as 'ow they'd orl seh 'Gud owd Ted' when it went o'a
t'pavilion."
Ted Peate on what went through his brain prior to its most famous
explosion
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
arahim
Yep. The paranoia here has been deafening (to mix metaphors) and more
indicative of peoples own religious biases.
> --
> Cheers,
> Rodney Ulyate
>
> "Ah wor thinkin' as 'ow they'd orl seh 'Gud owd Ted' when it went o'a
> t'pavilion."
> Ted Peate on what went through his brain prior to its most famous
> explosion
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -
Rodney
> On Sep 24, 2:06 pm, sdavmor <sdav...@fakeemailaddy.com> wrote:
>> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
>> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
>> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
>> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
>> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
> Can you imagine the mess we will be in if Ricky Ponting/Collingwood
> start thanking all "whites" after beating WI/India/Pak?
In this day and age, oh chiefly master, being in the (often historically
persecuted) minority allows you to get away with certain things,
overzealous belief-trumpeting being but one. You've never heard of
Straight Pride, for example.
>> Put the two things together and (for better or worse) the pakistan
>> captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
>> crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
>> icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
>> around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
>> should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
>> say a few words that make us grimace.
> Again, what would your reaction be if WI captain thanks all blacks
> after beating SA?
I was unaware that Black was a religion.
Kunal
"Rodney" <rodney...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46f82aaa$0$26366$8826...@free.teranews.com...
> Master Chief wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 2:06 pm, sdavmor <sdav...@fakeemailaddy.com> wrote:
>>> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
>>> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
>>> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
>>> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
>>> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for
>>> Pakistan.
>> Can you imagine the mess we will be in if Ricky Ponting/Collingwood
>> start thanking all "whites" after beating WI/India/Pak?
>
> In this day and age, oh chiefly master, being in the (often historically
> persecuted) minority allows you to get away with certain things,
> overzealous belief-trumpeting being but one. You've never heard of
> Straight Pride, for example.
Very intelligent post but you forget to mention "Whites" is not a religion
End of the comment you posted "Black" is not a religion
Sanjiv Karmarkar
The RSCers did not start this; it was started by Shoaib by his
offensive and insulting remarks.
And it comes as no surprise that you do not find these remarks
offensive.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
Kunal
Rodney friend, you must of Shakespeares lineage with your great oratory
english skills. Sankyou for being my free english teacher, I write down
every all english words you wrote here so I can turn the dictionary pages
and memorise meanings of your great english vocabulery skills.
I will am very greatful to you for teaching me complaisant, comradely and
feller today.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> In this day and age, oh chiefly master, being in the (often historically
> persecuted) minority allows you to get away with certain things,
> overzealous belief-trumpeting being but one. You've never heard of
> Straight Pride, for example.
If you are implying that Shoaib belongs to a historically persecuted
minority, you need history lessons. (And if you are not, you need
lessons in composition).
> I was unaware that Black was a religion.
You really don't understand OP's point do you? That's OK, it takes
all kinds.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
prabh...@hotmail.com
> "Rodney" <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Bring on Pandiyan against Rodney, I say.
RishiX
I am really surprised that YOU do not see anything wrong with Shoaib's
comments.
Why couldn't he just say Pakistanis? What does religion have to do
with his win or loss? He is representing a country - Pakistan. The
team he captained is not "Muslims" or "Islam". If Danish Kaneria had
captained the team and said "Thanks to all the Hindus in the world",
would your reaction have been the same?
The only thing I would have considered is, maybe he didn't mean to say
that and he was just nervous talking in English. Other than that I can
see no justification in mentioning religion. I didn't see anything
wrong with him thanking allah or mentioning "insha allah" in his
comments.
My $0.02,
Rishi.
Cric8Fan
be reprimanded for such insensitive comments.
Check http://blogs.cricinfo.com/meninwhite/archives/2007/09/scenes_from_a_final.php
Quote
Then the Pakistan captain said something that was so irrelevant that I
couldn't believe my ears. So I looked at the highlights over and over
again to make sure that I'd actually heard him say it. This is what he
said to master of ceremonies, Ravi Shastri, who asked him a
sympathetic question about the game after Shoaib had collected his
loser's medal:
"First of all I want to say something over here. I want to thank you
back home Pakistan and where the Muslim lives all over the world."
This is what he said word for word because it's important to quote him
correctly. The problem here isn't the syntax, it is the sentiment. I
don't expect Shoaib Malik to be a politically correct intellectual,
but it is reasonable to expect him to know the world of cricket that
he inhabits.
It is a world where Muslims, Hindus and a Sikh currently play for
England, where Buddhists, Muslims, Christians and a Hindu play for Sri
Lanka, where Hashim Amla turns out for South Africa, where a Patel
plays for New Zealand, where Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Hindus
play (and have always played) for India. Why would Shoaib think, then,
that the Muslims of the world were collectively rooting for the
Pakistan team or that they felt let down by its defeat? Did he stop to
think of how Danish Kaneria, his Hindu team-mate, might feel hearing
his Test skipper all but declare that the Pakistan team is a Muslim
team that plays for the Muslims of the world? It is one thing to be
publicly religious-Shahid Afridi thanked Allah and Matt Hayden and
Shaun Pollock are proud, believing Christians-quite another to declare
that your country's cricket eleven bats for international Islam.
Is this the forum to talk about this? Shouldn't Cricinfo and cricket's
online community stick to cricket and leave issues like this alone? No
we shouldn't, because Shoaib Malik chose to make it our business by
saying it in team colours at the end of the ICC World Twenty20 final.
He said something that goes to the heart of cricket's loyalties, its
culture, its plurality of race and faith and language. If Shoaib took
in nothing else about the final, he must have noticed that the bowler
who took his wicket was called Irfan Khan Pathan, that the Indian
team's most visible cheerleader, the guy who was hugging Indian
players in turn at the end of the game, was one Shah Rukh Khan. I feel
a residual distaste in even mentioning their names because both Shah
Rukh and Irfan are admired in India for what they've achieved, not who
they are. But sometimes it is important to spell things out and Shoaib
could do with the instruction.
End-quote
arahim
Please read Invoking God for my opinion on it. If Danish wants to
thank all Hindus I have no problem with it. As I have said I find it
amusing that victory in anything is attributed to God or religion but
if people want to do this it is up to them and if people wish to
criticise it is up to them. I just thought that the reaction on rsc
was overblown. Read some of the posts. What did they think Shoaib was
invoking? To which no one has given a real clear answer. Yet they have
accused him of almost being a fanatic. He made this comment in defeat
so even my god was better than your god (or religion) because I won,
does not even hold. What did he say? According to the OP
"Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
it." Which would literally mean that he is practically thanking all
nations and sorry we could not do it.
Does it deserve responses of the kind
"His statement almost gave the impression that he believed it
was a matchup between the muslims and non-muslims and he was
apologizing for letting the muslims down."
"He must have been told by Pakistani authority to make this kinda
stupid, and a real inflammatory statement. "
Or Geico's usual responses.
Or do people seriously believe he holds malice towards the Pathans?
The whole thing is overblown.
arahim
Who did he insult?
> And it comes as no surprise that you do not find these remarks
> offensive.
>
> Sanjiv Karmarkar- Hide quoted text -
Rodney
> sdavmor wrote:
>> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
>> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
>> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
>> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
>> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
>> etc., speeches.
I'm having real difficulty believing that. The Christian faith has
undergone an elephantine recession in the US over the course of the last
decade and a half.
> Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers alone)
> a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse following. A
> following, in which such comments would be seen as borderline hate speech.
It doesn't even approach that status, Geico, as there wasn't so much as
an ounce of spleen in his words. Although I agree that it was a silly,
presumptuous thing to say, I can't understand why offence should be
taken, especially as it's so evident that none was intended.
> Come off it, sdavmor. You are remarkably fair (I am purposely not using the
> word "even-handed" as it has been redefined out of existence in today's
> media.) in all your comments elsewhere. Why this blind spot ?
He seems far more clear-sighted than you at the moment, mate.
arahim
> > sdavmor wrote:
> >> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> >> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> >> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> >> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> >> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> >> etc., speeches.
> > about 90%+ of US population is Christian
>
> I'm having real difficulty believing that. The Christian faith has
> undergone an elephantine recession in the US over the course of the last
> decade and a half.
>
> > Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers alone)
> > a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse following. A
> > following, in which such comments would be seen as borderline hate speech.
>
> It doesn't even approach that status, Geico, as there wasn't so much as
> an ounce of spleen in his words. Although I agree that it was a silly,
> presumptuous thing to say, I can't understand why offence should be
> taken, especially as it's so evident that none was intended.
>
Exactly. RishiX, maybe this clears it up.
Rodney
> On Sep 24, 1:28 pm, Master Chief <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Now imagine someone saying that he thanked all people around the world
>> who have the same skin color. What Malik said was something like that.
>> sdavmor already mentioned that people have their biases like race,
>> creed so what Malik said is reasonable but many feel that it was
>> uncomfortable to hear at the least.
> cricketleague has addressed that.
All the more reason, surely, to readdress it.
LKM
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> etc., speeches.
>
> things:
>
> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
>
> IIRC) Muslim in faith.
>
> captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
> crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
> icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
> around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
> should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
> say a few words that make us grimace.
>
> think you're investing Mr. Malik's words with far more historical weight
> (and intentional venom) than his acknowledgment of personal and
> collective faith warrants.
>
> Cheers,
> SDM -- a 21st century schizoid man
> Systems Theory internet music project links:
> official site <www.systemstheory.net>
> MySpace MP3s <www.myspace.com/systemstheory>
> CDBaby <www.cdbaby.com/systemstheory>
> "Soundtracks For Imaginary Movies" CD released Dec 2004
> "Codetalkers" CD coming very soon
> NP: nothing
Does Pakistan team represent the former England captain Nasser Hussein?
LKM
Does Pakistan team represent the former English captain Nasser
Hussein?
LKM
Shoib Malik.
arahim
So why are you so upset?
>
>
> > > And it comes as no surprise that you do not find these remarks
> > > offensive.
>
> > > Sanjiv Karmarkar- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Mike Holmans
tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>Does Pakistan team represent the former England captain Nasser Hussein?
Why would a Christian born in India who captained England be
represented by the Pakistan team?
Cheers,
Mike
--
LKM
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:32:11 -0700, LKM <fragrance28_...@hotmail.com>
> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
> >Does Pakistan team represent the former England captain Nasser Hussein?
>
> Why would a Christian born in India who captained England be
> represented by the Pakistan team?
>
How does Pakistani team represent Muslims all over the world?
And, When did Nasser become Christian?
Last time I read the news about him, he was a Muslim.
> Cheers,
>
> Mike
> --
LKM
No reason to ask the same question, which has been answered multiples
times to you already,
Read it, loud and clear here, once again:
http://blogs.cricinfo.com/meninwhite/archives/2007/09/scenes_from_a_final.php
Master Chief
> > Again, what would your reaction be if WI captain thanks all blacks
> > after beating SA?
>
> I was unaware that Black was a religion.
I am quoting something from the post I was replying to. Hope it helps.
"People will pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour,
creed, or something else."
Maybe according to you it is ok to assume that everybody belonging to
your religion will support you when you are playing a team with a
different religion in majority but the moment the word religion is
replaced by "race" it becomes a wrong thing to do.
If you are unable to see how race and religion cause similar problems
then I am not going to try explaining that. Hope you never experience
these problems though.
arahim
> Many people around the world are disgusted by Shoaib Malik. He should
> be reprimanded for such insensitive comments.
>
Mukul Kesavan hardly makes the world.
> Checkhttp://blogs.cricinfo.com/meninwhite/archives/2007/09/scenes_from_a_f...
>
> Quote
>
> Then the Pakistan captain said something that was so irrelevant that I
> couldn't believe my ears. So I looked at the highlights over and over
> again to make sure that I'd actually heard him say it. This is what he
> said to master of ceremonies, Ravi Shastri, who asked him a
> sympathetic question about the game after Shoaib had collected his
> loser's medal:
>
> "First of all I want to say something over here. I want to thank you
> back home Pakistan and where the Muslim lives all over the world."
>
> This is what he said word for word because it's important to quote him
> correctly. The problem here isn't the syntax, it is the sentiment. I
> don't expect Shoaib Malik to be a politically correct intellectual,
> but it is reasonable to expect him to know the world of cricket that
> he inhabits.
>
> It is a world where Muslims, Hindus and a Sikh currently play for
> England, where Buddhists, Muslims, Christians and a Hindu play for Sri
> Lanka, where Hashim Amla turns out for South Africa, where a Patel
> plays for New Zealand, where Muslims, Sikhs, Christians and Hindus
> play (and have always played) for India. Why would Shoaib think, then,
> that the Muslims of the world were collectively rooting for the
> Pakistan team or that they felt let down by its defeat? Did he stop to
> think of how Danish Kaneria, his Hindu team-mate, might feel hearing
> his Test skipper all but declare that the Pakistan team is a Muslim
> team that plays for the Muslims of the world? It is one thing to be
I am still trying to find where he said all this. I am amazed at the
work of fiction that has been generated out of a one line statement.
James Farrar
http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,741300,00.html
"Nasser Hussain, a Madras-born, non-practising Muslim"
arahim
Well you said Shoaib Malik insulted himself. Why does that bother you.
Kesavan is talking of something else.
> Read it, loud and clear here, once again:http://blogs.cricinfo.com/meninwhite/archives/2007/09/scenes_from_a_f...
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> No reason to ask the same question, which has been answered multiples
> times to you already,
>
> Read it, loud and clear here, once again:http://blogs.cricinfo.com/meninwhite/archives/2007/09/scenes_from_a_f...
Very well written article; and what's even better are readers'
comments at the bottom. Most express disappointment, a few graciously
give benefit of doubt to Shoaib, and - much to my delight - almost
none express anger or antagonism. I was especially touched by a few
comments by Indian Moslems expressing their anguish after listening to
Shoaib. If you have not read those readers' comments, please do.
Contrast that with these ill-conceived attempts by Rodney and Arahim
to justify Shoaib's pan-religious attitude. Very sad.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
arahim
Didn't Gandhi support a pan-religious atittude? A view to life
including all religions. Are you saying Shoaib was uniting but he
should have been divisive?
> Sanjiv Karmarkar
Mohan
<snip>
> criticise it is up to them. I just thought that the reaction on rsc
> was overblown. Read some of the posts. What did they think Shoaib was
> invoking? To which no one has given a real clear answer.
ok, let me tell you what he was alluding to. I don't know if you are
aware, but this issue of Indian Muslims supporting Pakistan is a
sensitive issue. There is history behind it. And frankly, there are some
who do support Pakistan. Probably a minority, but let's face it, they
exist. It is normal for the Indian police to take additional security
measures in Muslim neighbourhoods on the day of an India-Pakistan match,
because there have been disturbances in the past on this matter. I don't
think Malik is naive enough to not know that. So his thanking of
"Muslims all over the world" was nothing but a veiled reference to
Indian Muslims. After all, it was an India-Pakistan match and vast
majority of those who were watching were Indians and Pakistanis. So why
not simply thank his fellow Pakistanis? Why bring in Muslims from all
over the world, when outside of Pakistan, majority of the Muslims
watching the game were Indians and hence presumably supporting India? It
was nothing but deliberate mischief. And as I said, this is not the
first time it has happened either.
Mohan
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:32:11 -0700, LKM <fragrance28_...@hotmail.com>
> >Does Pakistan team represent the former England captain Nasser Hussein?
>
> Why would a Christian born in India who captained England be
> represented by the Pakistan team?
That's precisely LKM's point.
Also, Hussein is an agnostic born of Moslem parents.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/religion/Story/0,,741300,00.html
>
> "Nasser Hussain, a Madras-born, non-practising Muslim"
This is correct. He is an agnostic although both his parents were
Moslems; his father by birth and his mother through conversion.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
arahim
> arahim wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > criticise it is up to them. I just thought that the reaction on rsc
> > was overblown. Read some of the posts. What did they think Shoaib was
> > invoking? To which no one has given a real clear answer.
>
> ok, let me tell you what he was alluding to. I don't know if you are
> aware, but this issue of Indian Muslims supporting Pakistan is a
> sensitive issue. There is history behind it. And frankly, there are some
> who do support Pakistan. Probably a minority, but let's face it, they
> exist. It is normal for the Indian police to take additional security
> measures in Muslim neighbourhoods on the day of an India-Pakistan match,
> because there have been disturbances in the past on this matter. I don't
> think Malik is naive enough to not know that. So his thanking of
> "Muslims all over the world" was nothing but a veiled reference to
> Indian Muslims. After all, it was an India-Pakistan match and vast
> majority of those who were watching were Indians and Pakistanis. So why
> not simply thank his fellow Pakistanis? Why bring in Muslims from all
> over the world, when outside of Pakistan, majority of the Muslims
> watching the game were Indians and hence presumably supporting India? It
> was nothing but deliberate mischief. And as I said, this is not the
> first time it has happened either.
>
Now the truth is starting to emerge and I will commend you Mohan for
it. People have been throwing all this crap about hurting the
sensitivities of Indian muslims when it is their own sensitivities
that have been hurt and they are using their countrymen as sheilds.
Now to your point that Shoaib must have been maliciously doing this?
Do you really believe it? He is married to an Indian muslim whose
family lives there and it is hardly advantageous to him to put them in
that position unless he has the same views on his mother-in-law as
Botham.
> Mohan
>
>
>
> > Yet they have
> > accused him of almost being a fanatic. He made this comment in defeat
> > so even my god was better than your god (or religion) because I won,
> > does not even hold. What did he say? According to the OP
> > "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> > it." Which would literally mean that he is practically thanking all
> > nations and sorry we could not do it.
>
> > Does it deserve responses of the kind
>
> > "His statement almost gave the impression that he believed it
> > was a matchup between the muslims and non-muslims and he was
> > apologizing for letting the muslims down."
>
> > "He must have been told by Pakistani authority to make this kinda
> > stupid, and a real inflammatory statement. "
>
> > Or Geico's usual responses.
> > Or do people seriously believe he holds malice towards the Pathans?
>
> > The whole thing is overblown.- Hide quoted text -
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> On Sep 24, 6:11 pm, Sanjiv Karmarkar <s_karmar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Contrast that with these ill-conceived attempts by Rodney and Arahim
> > to justify Shoaib's pan-religious attitude. Very sad.
>
> Didn't Gandhi support a pan-religious atittude?
You are not going to score a lot of points by invoking Gandhi to
someone from Pune with the last name Karmarkar! :-)
What I originally wrote was 'pan-Islamic' but changed the words. I
didn't want to go down that path traded by the likes of Shoaib.
Sanjiv Karmarkar
arahim
> On Sep 24, 9:21 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 24, 6:11 pm, Sanjiv Karmarkar <s_karmar...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > Contrast that with these ill-conceived attempts by Rodney and Arahim
> > > to justify Shoaib's pan-religious attitude. Very sad.
>
> > Didn't Gandhi support a pan-religious atittude?
>
> You are not going to score a lot of points by invoking Gandhi to
> someone from Pune with the last name Karmarkar! :-)
>
Be as that may I am not well versed in the internal Indian splits. I
was just baffled by what you were saying.
> What I originally wrote was 'pan-Islamic' but changed the words. I
> didn't want to go down that path traded by the likes of Shoaib.
>
There was no path. It is overblown.
> Sanjiv Karmarkar
CricketLeague
"Rodney" <rodney...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:46f84afd$0$26396$8826...@free.teranews.com...
> arahim wrote:
>> On Sep 24, 1:28 pm, Master Chief <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Now imagine someone saying that he thanked all people around the world
>>> who have the same skin color. What Malik said was something like that.
>>> sdavmor already mentioned that people have their biases like race,
>>> creed so what Malik said is reasonable but many feel that it was
>>> uncomfortable to hear at the least.
>> cricketleague has addressed that.
>
> All the more reason, surely, to readdress it.
Rodney,
REAL MEN dont use killfile......
Killfile was invented for WESTERN PUSSIES and FAGS like you.....
Sanjiv Karmarkar
> There was no path. It is overblown.
Doubtful. Fits too well in the overall pattern of his ilk for this to
be just a slip of the tongue.
SK
arahim
I am not saying it is a slip of tongue. I don't know. But literally
taking what he said does not hold the ghosts you attribute to it.
> SK
Mohan
>
> Now the truth is starting to emerge and I will commend you Mohan for
> it. People have been throwing all this crap about hurting the
> sensitivities of Indian muslims when it is their own sensitivities
> that have been hurt and they are using their countrymen as sheilds.
How did you arrive at that? His comments hurt the Indian Muslims too -
all those millions who do support the Indian team.
> Now to your point that Shoaib must have been maliciously doing this?
> Do you really believe it?
Yes, I do really believe his comment was malicious (especially because
this wasn't the first time) and I don't think it was his own idea
either. It is obligatory for Pakistani establishment to make such
comments on a global stage. They cannot accept the fact that Muslims can
live peacefully along with Hindus in a secular, democratic India because
it hits at the very basis of creation of Pakistan. The sooner they
accept it, the better it is for everyone, but so far they have not been
able to.
> He is married to an Indian muslim whose
> family lives there and it is hardly advantageous to him to put them in
> that position unless he has the same views on his mother-in-law as
> Botham.
I don't think his comments will have any effect on them personally. Even
if some right-wing loonies decide to take out their anger at Malik on
his in-laws, the Indian state is there to protect them, so there is no
need for Malik to worry.
Mohan
RishiX
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
On Sep 24, 5:31 pm, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Sep 24, 5:31 pm, Rodney <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Geico Caveman wrote:
> > > sdavmor wrote:
> > >> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> > >> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> > >> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> > >> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> > >> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> > >> etc., speeches.
> > > about 90%+ of US population is Christian
>
> > I'm having real difficulty believing that. The Christian faith has
> > undergone an elephantine recession in the US over the course of the last
> > decade and a half.
>
> > > Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers alone)
> > > a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse following. A
> > > following, in which such comments would be seen as borderline hate speech.
>
> > It doesn't even approach that status, Geico, as there wasn't so much as
> > an ounce of spleen in his words. Although I agree that it was a silly,
> > presumptuous thing to say, I can't understand why offence should be
> > taken, especially as it's so evident that none was intended.
>
> Exactly. RishiX, maybe this clears it up.
Arahim,
First of all Rodney is someone who has no clue about the sentiments of
an Ind-Pak game or about the history of India-Pakistan in general, but
as usual he has his views about everything. So I am not going to pay
much attention to that.
Secondly, I neither agree with any of the flaming comments made here
nor do I hint at any offence that Shoaib might have meant. Infact I
said,"maybe he didn't mean to say that and he was just nervous talking
in English". All I meant to say was, in Ind-Pak matches, especially in
a stage like the WC, comments about religion is not going to be
welcome and people should be aware of it. I did not ask you to condemn
what he said, but just understand the fact that it is always a
sensitive issue and religion is better left unmentioned unless the
situations requires one to. Once again, some people say God and some
say Allah, if that is the only way you know how to refer God, that is
fine. But mentioning religion is a totally different and sensitive
issue.
-- Rishi.
ango...@gmail.com
Oh really? Check out:
A blind eye to bigotry
Five years on, those behind the Gujarat anti-Muslim pogrom are still
running the state
Mike Marqusee
Thursday March 1, 2007
The Guardian
Five years ago this week, across the Indian state of Gujarat, the
stormtroopers of the Hindu right, decked in saffron sashes and armed
with swords, tridents, sledgehammers and liquid gas cylinders,
launched a pogrom against the local Muslim population. They looted and
torched Muslim-owned businesses, assaulted and murdered Muslims, and
gang-raped and mutilated Muslim women. By the time the violence
spluttered to a halt, about 2,500 Muslims had been killed and about
200,000 driven from their homes.
The pogrom was distinguished not only by its ferocity and sadism
(foetuses were ripped from the bellies of pregnant women, old men
bludgeoned to death) but also by its meticulous advance planning. The
leaders used mobile phones to coordinate the movement of an army of
thousands through densely populated areas, targeting Muslim properties
with the aid of computerised lists and electoral rolls provided by
state agencies.
Much of the violence unfolded with the full collaboration of the
police. In some cases, police fired at Muslims seeking to flee the
mobs. When asked to help a group of girls being raped on the roof of a
building, police officers demurred, explaining: "They have been given
24 hours to kill you." Subsequent investigations confirmed that police
knew in advance of the pogrom and had been instructed not to interfere
with it.
Indian and global human rights organisations have singled out
Gujarat's chief minister, Narendra Modi, of the Bharatiya Janata party
(BJP), as the principal culprit. As a result of his alleged complicity
in mass murder, he was denied a visa to the US and cannot visit
Britain for fear of arrest.
Yet Modi remains chief minister and has become not only the BJP's most
popular figurehead, but also a poster boy for big business, foreign
and domestic. Gujarat, which contains 5% of India's population, now
boasts 18% of its investment and 21% of its exports. At this year's
Vibrant Gujarat conclave, the showpiece of the BJP regime, the great
names of Indian capitalism - Ambani, Birla, Tata - sang Modi's
praises, echoed by delegations from Singapore, Europe and the US.
Anxieties about dealing with a politician accused of genocide have
been allayed by the appeal of Gujarat's corporation-friendly
environment, not least its labour laws, which give employers hire-and-
fire rights unique in India.
Five years on, Muslims in Gujarat still live in fear. About 50,000
remain in refugee camps. Most of the cases filed by victims of the
violence have never been investigated. Witnesses have been
intimidated. No more than a dozen low-level culprits have been
convicted. None of the major conspirators has been brought before the
courts.
The events of 2002 did not conform to the paradigm of the war on
terror, in which India was a prize ally, so never achieved the infamy
in the west they deserved. An array of interests - in New Delhi,
London and Washington - is dedicated to ensuring the atrocity is
consigned to oblivion. For them, the release of Parzania, a feature
film centred on the violence, is an uncomfortable development. Despite
dramatic flaws, it accurately depicts the savagery of the anti-Muslim
violence, its planned, coordinated character, and the complicity of
the police and the state government. Cinemas in Gujarat, under
pressure from the Hindu right, are refusing to screen the film.
If and when Parzania reaches audiences here and in the US, it will
offer a necessary counter-tale to the fashionable fable of the Indian
neoliberal miracle, exposing the brutality and bigotry that have gone
hand in hand with zooming growth rates and hi-tech triumphalism.
· Mike Marqusee writes a column for the Hindu; his most recent book is
Wicked Messenger: Bob Dylan and the 1960s.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2023837,00.html
Kunal
<prabh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1190673912....@50g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
> On Sep 24, 6:31 pm, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> "Rodney" <rodney.uly...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>
>> news:46f829a0$0$26366$8826...@free.teranews.com...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Geico Caveman preached:
>> >> Master Chief wrote:
>> >>> it."
>> english skills. Sankyou for being my free english teacher, I write down
>> every all english words you wrote here so I can turn the dictionary pages
>> and memorise meanings of your great english vocabulery skills.
>>
>> I will am very greatful to you for teaching me complaisant, comradely and
>> feller today.
>>
>>
>>
>> > --
>> > Cheers,
>> > Rodney Ulyate
>>
>> > "Ah wor thinkin' as 'ow they'd orl seh 'Gud owd Ted' when it went o'a
>> > t'pavilion."
>> > Ted Peate on what went through his brain prior to its most famous
>> > explosion
>>
>> > --
>> > Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide
>> > quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
>
I know pandavas and kauravas but no pandiyans/pandoyans. Please do not talk
about history on cricket newsgroup and confuze me.
prakmel
Fully agreed with your POV.
Speaking about the comments in the blog, I found this very much
hitting the nail on the head:
------------------------------
As an Indian Muslim, I was aghast at reading Malik's statement on
Cricinfo, soon after the high of reveling in India's victory. What I
wanted to shout out loud in his ear was, "Sorry to burst your bubble
bro, but I was a Muslim rooting for India and your loss gladdened me
to no end!"
--------------------------
Why would a captain try to mix up sport with religion? Especially
after such a thrilling encounter?
I do wonder whether the Pakistani media will cover this aspect.
Mohan
I almost wrote "Gujarat notwithstanding" in that last sentence there,
but didn't. Yes, Gujarat is a blot on India's secular record and there
is no point denying that. But let it not detract from the fact that
millions of Muslims, more than the population of Pakistan, are living in
India peacefully with many of them occupying important positions in the
society.
So yes, Indian state *will* protect Malik's in-laws and there is
absolutely no need for him to worry on that count.
arahim
There are other blots as well.
> So yes, Indian state *will* protect Malik's in-laws and there is
> absolutely no need for him to worry on that count.
No one doubts that. That is not the point. Why would he even chance
harm. After all stoning of players' houses is not uncommon including
Dhoni's.
arahim
I think we are talking about basic human decency which most unbiased
observers are capable of discerning.
> Secondly, I neither agree with any of the flaming comments made here
> nor do I hint at any offence that Shoaib might have meant. Infact I
> said,"maybe he didn't mean to say that and he was just nervous talking
> in English". All I meant to say was, in Ind-Pak matches, especially in
> a stage like the WC, comments about religion is not going to be
> welcome and people should be aware of it. I did not ask you to condemn
> what he said, but just understand the fact that it is always a
> sensitive issue and religion is better left unmentioned unless the
> situations requires one to. Once again, some people say God and some
> say Allah, if that is the only way you know how to refer God, that is
> fine. But mentioning religion is a totally different and sensitive
> issue.
>
I understand. All I am saying is that to attribute with such certainty
and venom to him what has been attributed to him for the phrase he
uttered even if taken literally is way, way out of proportion.
To attribute certain maliciousness is way out of line.
> -- Rishi.- Hide quoted text -
Mohan
>>
>
> There are other blots as well.
I am sure there are. It is a huge country of billion people with
thousands of problems to solve.
>
>> So yes, Indian state *will* protect Malik's in-laws and there is
>> absolutely no need for him to worry on that count.
>
> No one doubts that.
I thought angoorkha did when he asked "Oh really?".
> That is not the point. Why would he even chance
> harm. After all stoning of players' houses is not uncommon including
> Dhoni's.
Because the chance of harm is negligible and making the statement he did
serves the larger purpose I explained in my previous post.
Mohan
RishiX
> observers are capable of discerning.
I don't agree. One needs to understand the sentiments involved between
Ind-Pak to even get a grasp of why such comments are made - right or
wrong and he has no clue.
>
> > Secondly, I neither agree with any of the flaming comments made here
> > nor do I hint at any offence that Shoaib might have meant. Infact I
> > said,"maybe he didn't mean to say that and he was just nervous talking
> > in English". All I meant to say was, in Ind-Pak matches, especially in
> > a stage like the WC, comments about religion is not going to be
> > welcome and people should be aware of it. I did not ask you to condemn
> > what he said, but just understand the fact that it is always a
> > sensitive issue and religion is better left unmentioned unless the
> > situations requires one to. Once again, some people say God and some
> > say Allah, if that is the only way you know how to refer God, that is
> > fine. But mentioning religion is a totally different and sensitive
> > issue.
>
> I understand. All I am saying is that to attribute with such certainty
> and venom to him what has been attributed to him for the phrase he
> uttered even if taken literally is way, way out of proportion.
> To attribute certain maliciousness is way out of line.
Agree. But if Shoaib would listen to me, I would ask him not to
mention religion again on a cricket stage.
-- Rishi
Mohan
>>
>> First of all Rodney is someone who has no clue about the sentiments of
>> an Ind-Pak game or about the history of India-Pakistan in general, but
>> as usual he has his views about everything. So I am not going to pay
>> much attention to that.
>>
>
> I think we are talking about basic human decency which most unbiased
> observers are capable of discerning.
The word there is ignorant - those who are unaware of the background and
history of Indo-Pak relations. Almost every Indian saw Malik's statement
for what it is - go take a look at the comments on Mukul Kesavan's blog,
including those by Muslim-sounding names.
Mohan
arahim
What would you say of politics?
> -- Rishi- Hide quoted text -
arahim
Please take a look again. Many are critical of Kesavan including Hindu-
sounding names. And of course this is not scietific polling.
> Mohan
Mohan
ok, so much for my attempt to drum up support from blog comments :-) Let
me stick to the blogs themselves. Mukul Kesavan is no rabid Hindutva
supporter. Like most Indian historians, he is a leftist. Being a
historian, he knows what he is talking about in this case. And he took
exception to Malik's statement.
Or take a look at this well-read blogger,
http://greatbong.net/2007/09/24/we-won/ , who again, is not from the
saffron brigade either (his previous post basically criticised the
hindutva guys for making a hue and cry when the Indian Government said
there is no historical evidence to suggest that Lord Rama existed).
This is what he writes in response to Malik's statement:
--
I understand the pan-Islamic sentiment that has been fed into your brain
but here’s the deal. Look around. See the smiling Pathan brothers
there—-one of whom strangled your team’s progress in the middle overs
and the other led a rousing charge on your opening bowler. Tell you
what, they also belong to the “Muslims of the world” and yet are
deliriously happy at your defeat . Why wouldn’t they be ? They caused it.
Just as happy as many Indian Muslims are today all over the world at
India’s victory.
Which is why it should be brought to your notice that Pakistan’s fan
base does not cover Irfan Pathan, Yousuf Pathan and many other “Muslims
all over the world” and so there is no need to “thank them” for their
supposed “support”.
Let me say dear sir, Pakistan has always been my favorite team after
India ever since I started watching the game. Though the way you guys
wear your religion on your sleeve has often left me a bit queasy, your
statement today just crossed the line, more so because it is soundbytes
like these that are often twisted to imply that “Muslims in India cheer
for Pakistan ” which as a generalization is about as screwed up as
Michael Jackson’s sexuality. So kindly excuse my outburst —it indeed is
a shame to have to bring all this divisive stuff into the mix on such a
nice day. But you started it.
--
Mohan
arahim
There is nothing in your previous post. if there are others around who
believe like you that he was purposefully malicious then the risk
becomes high. Hopefully that is not the case.
> Mohan
SultanOfSwing
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> etc., speeches.
>
> things:
>
> (1) recognizing the fact that around the world the vast majority of
> Muslims probably were cheering for Pakistan. Especially those who are
> casual cricket fans picking a team, not theirs, to support. People will
> pick on some inherent prejudice, whether it's colour, creed, or
> something else. My guess is that non-aligned Muslims cheered for Pakistan.
Well, it's only a guess. Firstly, for the uninformed, India has
a larger population of Muslims than Pakistan. Shoaib Malik
probably would have known about this. Even if he didn't, he
didn't need to explicitly thank "Muslims" to give it communal
undertones. The first part of his statement was perfectly valid
"I want to thank you back home Pakistan". It's the second
part that has irritated me no end.
> (2) acknowledging the fact that his team is predominantly (almost all
> IIRC) Muslim in faith.
Yes. Except for Danish Kaneria, a Hindu, who wasn't a part
of the T20 squad, everyone else in the Pakistani cricket team
are Muslims. Yet, one doesn't need to exhibit one's religion
on their shirtsleeves. This is not an isolated incident concerning
the Pakistani cricketers and their overt display of
religiosity.
Pakistani players had even in the past been advised by the
PCB Chairman, Dr Nasim Ashraf, to avoid exhibiting their
religious beliefs in public.
See the URL below for more details.
http://tinyurl.com/2sr34u
> Put the two things together and (for better or worse) the pakistan
> captain has a 800lb gorilla of the expectations on his shoulders, and in
> crunch time his team failed. I may wish that sports (and film+music+TV)
> icons would shut their yaps about religion, but it usually leaks out
> around the edges to evaporate into thin air shortly thereafter, so why
> should I (or you) expect one man with all that pressure on him to not
> say a few words that make us grimace.
Well, if it was an isolated incident, I may well have shrugged
it off. However, this "overt" display of religiosity has happened
in the past when Inzy was the captain, and there are
indications that it may very well happen in the future.
arahim
> arahim wrote:
> > On Sep 24, 9:27 pm, Mohan <mohan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> arahim wrote:
>
> >>>> First of all Rodney is someone who has no clue about the sentiments of
> >>>> an Ind-Pak game or about the history of India-Pakistan in general, but
> >>>> as usual he has his views about everything. So I am not going to pay
> >>>> much attention to that.
> >>> I think we are talking about basic human decency which most unbiased
> >>> observers are capable of discerning.
> >> The word there is ignorant - those who are unaware of the background and
> >> history of Indo-Pak relations. Almost every Indian saw Malik's statement
> >> for what it is - go take a look at the comments on Mukul Kesavan's blog,
> >> including those by Muslim-sounding names.
>
> > Please take a look again. Many are critical of Kesavan including Hindu-
> > sounding names. And of course this is not scietific polling.
>
> ok, so much for my attempt to drum up support from blog comments :-) Let
> me stick to the blogs themselves. Mukul Kesavan is no rabid Hindutva
> supporter. Like most Indian historians, he is a leftist. Being a
> historian, he knows what he is talking about in this case. And he took
> exception to Malik's statement.
>
Let me say this. What Malik said was a simple inocuous statement
(taken literally), if irrelevant. What has been done to it is politics
paraded in the guise of extremist religion.
> Or take a look at this well-read blogger,http://greatbong.net/2007/09/24/we-won/, who again, is not from the
> saffron brigade either (his previous post basically criticised the
> hindutva guys for making a hue and cry when the Indian Government said
> there is no historical evidence to suggest that Lord Rama existed).
>
> This is what he writes in response to Malik's statement:
> --
> I understand the pan-Islamic sentiment that has been fed into your brain
> but here's the deal. Look around. See the smiling Pathan brothers
> there--one of whom strangled your team's progress in the middle overs
> and the other led a rousing charge on your opening bowler. Tell you
> what, they also belong to the "Muslims of the world" and yet are
> deliriously happy at your defeat . Why wouldn't they be ? They caused it.
>
> Just as happy as many Indian Muslims are today all over the world at
> India's victory.
>
> Which is why it should be brought to your notice that Pakistan's fan
> base does not cover Irfan Pathan, Yousuf Pathan and many other "Muslims
> all over the world" and so there is no need to "thank them" for their
> supposed "support".
>
> Let me say dear sir, Pakistan has always been my favorite team after
> India ever since I started watching the game. Though the way you guys
> wear your religion on your sleeve has often left me a bit queasy, your
> statement today just crossed the line, more so because it is soundbytes
> like these that are often twisted to imply that "Muslims in India cheer
> for Pakistan " which as a generalization is about as screwed up as
> Michael Jackson's sexuality. So kindly excuse my outburst -it indeed is
> a shame to have to bring all this divisive stuff into the mix on such a
> nice day. But you started it.
> --
>
> Mohan- Hide quoted text -
arahim
>
This is attributing political overtones to what was a simple enough
statement from a twenty-six year old who had just finished a thrilling
final and probably had nothing of the nature on his mind while giving
the interview.
Mohan
Not really. I am merely criticising him for making a malicious
statement, not questioning his right to do so. Or in other words,
disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you go and attack him and his
relatives.
Mohan
arahim
I know that and you know that but obviously not everyone does. When
people attack they are coming from the opposing camp and are not
usually the ones who love (love-hate relations apart) you.
> Mohan
>
>
>
> > Hopefully that is not the case.
>
> >> Mohan- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
ango...@gmail.com
Mohan, I hope you are right. As long as you think it is a blot,
instead of defending it like some posters here, you are ok in my book.
Co-incidentally one of the folks I was watching the match with is Mrs
Malik's far off cousin from Hyderabad, and yes he was vociferously
supporting India. FWIW.
Geico Caveman
>> Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers
>> alone) a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse
>> following. A following, in which such comments would be seen as
>> borderline hate speech.
>
> It doesn't even approach that status, Geico, as there wasn't so much as
> an ounce of spleen in his words. Although I agree that it was a silly,
> presumptuous thing to say, I can't understand why offence should be
> taken, especially as it's so evident that none was intended.
Might I suggest a hot cup of chicken soup, a warm sofa and a comprehensive
text/set of texts on the history of Pakistan-India relations, their genesis
in the 1,000 years of Islamist pogroms against non-Muslim native population
and their religion/culture, and the contemporary reaction to those pogroms,
and relatively recent radicalization of the Pakistani cricket team and
Pakistani society in general ?
It might help in better informing your otherwise well written comments on
this thread.
>
>> Come off it, sdavmor. You are remarkably fair (I am purposely not using
>> the word "even-handed" as it has been redefined out of existence in
>> today's media.) in all your comments elsewhere. Why this blind spot ?
>
> He seems far more clear-sighted than you at the moment, mate.
>
Clear sightedness can be arrived at mainly in two ways. Thorough
understanding of the background of an issue (which I and many Indians on
this thread happen to have), or a perfunctory familiarity with it, which
may pass for erudition in the heady atmosphere of a ballroom, but would be
laughable (to put it kindly) in a serious discussion.
There is nothing wrong with accidental ignorance. It makes conversation
delightful and informative. It is its wilful adherence that tends to put a
chill in the works.
Hence my suggestion above :)
arahim
wrote:
> Rodney wrote:
> >> Cricket, on the other hand, is a worldwide and (going by fan numbers
> >> alone) a much more popular sport. It also has a far more diverse
> >> following. A following, in which such comments would be seen as
> >> borderline hate speech.
>
> > It doesn't even approach that status, Geico, as there wasn't so much as
> > an ounce of spleen in his words. Although I agree that it was a silly,
> > presumptuous thing to say, I can't understand why offence should be
> > taken, especially as it's so evident that none was intended.
>
> Might I suggest a hot cup of chicken soup, a warm sofa and a comprehensive
> text/set of texts on the history of Pakistan-India relations, their genesis
> in the 1,000 years of Islamist pogroms against non-Muslim native population
> and their religion/culture, and the contemporary reaction to those pogroms,
> and relatively recent radicalization of the Pakistani cricket team and
> Pakistani society in general ?
>
Geico I suggest you do the same. And get some real books.
> It might help in better informing your otherwise well written comments on
> this thread.
>
>
>
> >> Come off it, sdavmor. You are remarkably fair (I am purposely not using
> >> the word "even-handed" as it has been redefined out of existence in
> >> today's media.) in all your comments elsewhere. Why this blind spot ?
>
> > He seems far more clear-sighted than you at the moment, mate.
>
> Clear sightedness can be arrived at mainly in two ways. Thorough
> understanding of the background of an issue (which I and many Indians on
> this thread happen to have), or a perfunctory familiarity with it, which
> may pass for erudition in the heady atmosphere of a ballroom, but would be
> laughable (to put it kindly) in a serious discussion.
>
Well it was not as laughable as it is after you make your appearance.
> There is nothing wrong with accidental ignorance. It makes conversation
So what is your excuse?
> delightful and informative. It is its wilful adherence that tends to put a
> chill in the works.
>
Ah you know yourself so well.
> Hence my suggestion above :)
This is the best peace of comedy I have seen in a long time.
Wog George
"Master Chief" <suse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> it."
>
I went to bed straight after the match and didn't see it, but I think he's
playing down the wrong line. He was representing Pakistan, the people of
and from Pakistan, and Pakistan supporters wherever they may be.
On the other hand I can't think of a nation where there are no Muslims, so
perhaps it was his veiled way of thanking planet Earth for making the World
T20 possible.
--
George
"We've got Jews and perverts and bullies and all kinds of sinners in this
town, Sister Ann." - Eric Cartman - 26 July 2000
Wog George
"sdavmor" <sda...@fakeemailaddy.com> wrote in message
news:_aOdnS1nXPAPYWrb...@iswest.net...
>
> Not having seen the presentation footage, I'm not sure that I'd read
> anything more into this than Tony Dungy going on about "the lord was
> testing us during our mid-season collapse" in his Super Bowl victory
> speech, and other "praise Jesus my savior for making me a winner and
> giving me this oscar/platinum selling album/heavyweight world title",
> etc., speeches.
>
>
nothing to do with religion at all.
--
George
"Dolphins, Eskimos, who cares?! It's all a bunch of tree hugging hippie
crap!" - Eric Cartman - 20 August 1997
Wog George
"CricketLeague" <Cricket...@USA.com> wrote in message
news:13fg22b...@news.supernews.com...
>
>
> Didnt bush talk about CRUSADES the moment US was hit on 911 ?
>
>
He was referring to the pieces of bread in his soup...
--
George
"I got such a raging clue that I almost shot clue goo all over Joe." - Frank
Hardly - 11 October 2006
outsourci...@yahoo.com
> On Sep 24, 1:56 pm, outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 24, 9:27 pm, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > "alalagandan" <a...@gan.dan> wrote in message
>
> > >news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
>
> > > > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:09:05 -0700, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > >>"Master Chief" <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > >>news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> > > >>> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> > > >>> it."
>
>
> > > > So , He thanks India as well.
>
> > > Pakistan management should tell the players not to talk religion in sports
>
> > While I believe its okay to thank God while accepting a prize, it
> > should not become a situation about talking about individual
> > religions. Like I thank all Hindus, or I thank all Christians or I
> > thank all muslims, buddhists etc.- Hide quoted text -
>
> Why are you being callous to athiests?
Since atheists by their very own definition do not believe in God how
can they be classified in any religion per se. But if you believe the
philosophy of atheism is a religion in and of itself than I apologize
and should include all atheists etc. after buddhists.
arahim
> On Sep 25, 1:58 am, arahim <arahim_ara...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sep 24, 1:56 pm, outsourcingbusin...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > > On Sep 24, 9:27 pm, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > "alalagandan" <a...@gan.dan> wrote in message
>
> > > >news:7poff3dv0naups1bn...@4ax.com...
>
> > > > > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 09:09:05 -0700, "Kunal" <Kunal9Kap...@hotmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
>
> > > > >>"Master Chief" <susene...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > >>news:1190649750.0...@y42g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> > > > >>> "Thanks to all nations where muslim lives and sorry we could not do
> > > > >>> it."
>
> > > > >>Shoaib Malik married a muslim girl from Hyderabad, India
>
> > > > > So , He thanks India as well.
>
> > > > Pakistan management should tell the players not to talk religion in sports
>
> > > While I believe its okay to thank God while accepting a prize, it
> > > should not become a situation about talking about individual
> > > religions. Like I thank all Hindus, or I thank all Christians or I
> > > thank all muslims, buddhists etc.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > Why are you being callous to athiests?
>
> Since atheists by their very own definition do not believe in God how
That is correct.
> can they be classified in any religion per se. But if you believe the
They cannot.
> philosophy of atheism is a religion in and of itself than I apologize
> and should include all atheists etc. after buddhists.
>
>
I meant mention of a god would affect their sensibilities. We were
being told mention of muslims affects sensibilities of other
religions, then of muslims themselves and the it was a political
matter.
I think if they really want to fix things their is a lot they can do
rather than target poor Shoaib.
Wog George
"Mike Holmans" <mi...@jackalope.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:5cmgf31c5aa3t1ujj...@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 17:32:11 -0700, LKM <fragran...@hotmail.com>
> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
>
>
>>Does Pakistan team represent the former England captain Nasser Hussein?
>
> Why would a Christian born in India who captained England be
> represented by the Pakistan team?
>
>
There's a show here called 1 vs 100, sort-of like a Who Wants To Be A
Millionaire with a difference. You probably already have it. Anyway, there
was a question asking which country Nasser Hussain had been the captain of.
The choices were Pakistan, England and India. The contestant immediately
ruled out England and just tossed up between the other two. Luckily for him
he couldn't decide, and "trusted the mob" instead.
--
George
"I will be able to tell my grandkids that I hit the future monarch around
the head with a 2 pound potato." - David Robertson - 15 December 2006