Insect in Beer
-
smaaaart wrote:
As for accusing Pakis of raising
:wtf: Well, that just about proves my hypothesis, as if the rest of your screed already didn't.
smaaaart wrote:
Of course, you won't find all that in today's news. Or yesterday's. And so on.
So, in fact, you ackowledge that they don't "bring it up most of the time."
smaaaart wrote:
Pakistanis are still sore that they couldn't snatch Kashmir away from us, despite their repeated attempts.
This seems quite defensive to me.
smaaaart wrote:
The front page of a news site is no "source backing your claim up."
Yeh it does, you said "Pakistani's bring up Kashmir most of the time" I provided a link to a Pakistani newspaper that didn't mention it at all. For your contention to be likely to be valid, more than 50% of the articles would need to mention it.
smaaaart wrote:
If you think I can't back up my "claim" statistically or quantitatively or otherwise, I don't care. I don't need to
This is a pretty typical argument of someone who can't back up their claims.
smaaaart wrote:
We do joke about Pakistan and India and Kashmir and what not, but it's not a joke at all.
Wait. What? Are these racist "jokes" jokes or not? If not they are just racist.
smaaaart wrote:
The situation is much more serious than you realize.
Oh, I know well enough about the situation in Kashmir, I just don't think it justifies the casual anti-Pakistani sentiment exhibited by a minority of [ostensibly] Indian members here.
Sort of a cross between Lawrence of Arabia and Dilbert.[^]
-Or-
A Dead ringer for Kate Winslett[^]Sigh. This is going on and on, longer than I expected. This would be my last reply in this thread, and after that, I am done with you.
smaaaart wrote:
Pakis
Keith Barrow wrote:
:WTF:
What??? Pakistan is often called "Pak" for short (Pakis themselves do it), and their nationals Pakis. I don't know what's "WTF" about it, or racist, or whatever.
Keith Barrow wrote:
So, in fact, you ackowledge that they don't "bring it up most of the time."
So you insist "most of the time" means "every single day?" Are you always this stubborn, or just slow? Just a few days ago, there was a talk show on some Pak news channel where they were talking to an Indian politician about whether a terrorist who was involved in the 26/11 bombing should be handed over to the Indian authorities. And they (the Pakis) still managed to bring Kashmir into it, even though the topic had nothing to do with Kashmir at all. But of course you didn't see that show, and you don't know about many such incidents. And of course you won't find such things on a news site. Because these things are not talked about in NEWS. They are talked about in live shows, debates, press releases, statements by somebody or the other, and so on.
Keith Barrow wrote:
This seems quite defensive to me.
It was mocking them for trying so many times and failing. What is defensive about it? Saying we kicked their butt and that they are still sore is defensive? What are you smoking?
Keith Barrow wrote:
Yeh it does, you said "Pakistani's bring up Kashmir most of the time" I provided a link to a Pakistani newspaper that didn't mention it at all. For your contention to be likely to be valid, more than 50% of the articles would need to mention it.
You are going on and on about something about which you have no idea at all. And that last statement of yours:
Quote:
For your contention to be likely to be valid, more than 50% of the articles would need to mention it.
...is pretty idiotic, really. So if and only if more than 50% of the articles in a Paki newspaper are about Kashmir, then and only then my contention is likely to be valid (it would still not be valid, just be