Bhajji 'slaps' Sreesanth, leaves him crying

I just call as the short-term of the word Pakistan. Not in a racial sense as the brits do.

black people call each other n****r. But that means that they are now accepted into the club.

But if you call someone a 'paki' that could be a problem.

Josh Carney wrote:Sreesanth has been annoying the rubbish out of everybody opponents and his team mates alike. He has riled and ridiculed guys like Sachin and Viru amongst others. He had it coming at some point from somebody. Bhaji has a problem in controlling his emotions when provoked that is a given however the guy who is responsible to me at the root is Sreesanth.

Who the hell does Sachin think he is ..

Is he above all ridicule .. should opposition players bow and prostrate before his highness 'the little master'.

Ask him to go to hell.

he can take a ribbing from a McGrath but throws attitude when a Sreesanth does the same.

Isn't Sree allowed to be aggressive ?

If I were playing I would have slapped Sachin as well .. just for fun.

*Buckaroo* wrote:I just call as the short-term of the word Pakistan. Not in a racial sense as the brits do.

black people call each other n****r. But that means that they are now accepted into the club.

But if you call someone a 'paki' that could be a problem.

Truly amazing, every Pakstani here was complained about that particular usage, but Mr Non Racist deems it acceptable.

I have used Subi in the past as a purely geographical term, but he deems that racist.

taipan wrote:

*Buckaroo* wrote:I just call as the short-term of the word Pakistan. Not in a racial sense as the brits do.

black people call each other n****r. But that means that they are now accepted into the club.

But if you call someone a 'paki' that could be a problem.

Truly amazing, every Pakstani here was complained about that particular usage, but Mr Non Racist deems it acceptable.

I have used Subi in the past as a purely geographical term, but he deems that racist.

fine, I won't use that word again. I apologize to the Pakistanis.

*Buckaroo* wrote:

Josh Carney wrote:Sreesanth has been annoying the rubbish out of everybody opponents and his team mates alike. He has riled and ridiculed guys like Sachin and Viru amongst others. He had it coming at some point from somebody. Bhaji has a problem in controlling his emotions when provoked that is a given however the guy who is responsible to me at the root is Sreesanth.

Who the hell does Sachin think he is ..

Is he above all ridicule .. should opposition players bow and prostrate before his highness 'the little master'.

Ask him to go to hell.

he can take a ribbing from a McGrath but throws attitude when a Sreesanth does the same.

Isn't Sree allowed to be aggressive ?

If I were playing I would have slapped Sachin as well .. just for fun.

Sreesanth has a problem let us face it and not thrash around at others. And he lost more respect by playing victim with his silly sobbing.

but a mis-field by an Aussie or SA or even a Paki

implies that "Paki"s are lesser than "Aussies or SA's" ...definitely racist

embee wrote:

but a mis-field by an Aussie or SA or even a Paki

implies that "Paki"s are lesser than "Aussies or SA's" ...definitely racist

Clearly by his definition they are "littler"

embee wrote:

but a mis-field by an Aussie or SA or even a Paki

implies that "Paki"s are lesser than "Aussies or SA's" ...definitely racist

If I go to England, I'll be called a paki by the yobs .. no ?

Atleast behind my back they will.

*Buckaroo* wrote:

embee wrote:

but a mis-field by an Aussie or SA or even a Paki

implies that "Paki"s are lesser than "Aussies or SA's" ...definitely racist

If I go to England, I'll be called a paki by the yobs .. no ?

Atleast behind my back they will.

Bucky in yet another 2 wrongs make a right defence.

Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

embee wrote:Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

For starters, I have access to certain facts that you don't.

Well .. Benazir Bhutto who was the Prime Minister of Pakistan had once mentioned that

in Pakistani text books during the period of United Pakistan (when East and West Pakistan were together) used to refer to Bangladeshis as

Small, dark people who eat rice and fish as compared to the taller people in West Pakistan who eat meat and wheat.

Then there was a period in Bangladesh during the riots when the West Pakistanis tried to purify their little Bangladeshi brethren by

'raping them'. So that they could grow taller and fairer.

So I was mentioning this aspect of racism.

If I have to damned anyways, I shall be damned speaking the truth.

embee wrote:Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

It's along the lines of "Sree is a crybaby but how about that Nel"

*Buckaroo* wrote:

embee wrote:Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

For starters, I have access to certain facts that you don't.

Well .. Benazir Bhutto who was the Prime Minister of Pakistan had once mentioned that

in Pakistani text books during the period of United Pakistan (when East and West Pakistan were together) used to refer to Bangladeshis as

Small people who eat rice and fish as compared to the taller people in West Pakistan who eat meat and wheat.

Then there was a period in Bangladesh during the riots when the West Pakistanis tried to purify their little Bangladeshi brethren by

'raping them'. So that they could grow taller and fairer.

So I was mentioning this aspect of racism.

If I have to damned anyways, I shall be damned speaking the truth.

And now we have the obfuscation defence.

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

It's along the lines of "Sree is a crybaby but how about that Nel"

Whenever cornered you try and change the subject. Isn't that you standard tactic ?

deflect attention from potential crybaby Nel to a S. (sobbing) Sreesant.

*Buckaroo* wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Is that the 'only whities can be racist' card I see?

It's along the lines of "Sree is a crybaby but how about that Nel"

Whenever cornered you try and change the subject. Isn't that you standard tactic ?

Hey, isn't this thread about Sree, but moved onto your racism.

*Buckaroo* wrote: Is he above all ridicule .. should opposition players bow and prostrate before his highness 'the little master'.

Did you just call Sachin Tendulkar 'little'?

Everyone is racist.

Except for myself. that is the conclusion I have reached from my debates.

Isn't Buck only racist to counter the whiteys who are all racist and cover their racism by not saying or doing anything racist?

Batman wrote:

*Buckaroo* wrote: Is he above all ridicule .. should opposition players bow and prostrate before his highness 'the little master'.

Did you just calkl Sachin Tendulkar 'little'?

yes, but in this case the word little is added to a complimentary adjective.

litte master, little genius.

I welcome such usage of little.

embee wrote:Isn't Buck only racist to counter the whiteys who are all racist and cover their racism by not saying or doing anything racist?

So logically his racist comments prove his non racism as only tue non racists can safely use racist comments, thereby proving their non racism.

In that case ...

Bucks you are an Indian ****....now dont accuse me of racism

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Isn't Buck only racist to counter the whiteys who are all racist and cover their racism by not saying or doing anything racist?

So logically his racist comments prove his non racism as only tue non racists can safely use racist comments, thereby proving their non racism.

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Isn't Buck only racist to counter the whiteys who are all racist and cover their racism by not saying or doing anything racist?

So logically his racist comments prove his non racism as only tue non racists can safely use racist comments, thereby proving their non racism.

the key to discerning racist from non-racist comments is the intention of the speaker.

Mandela calling his fellow Africans as 'Kaffir' wouldn't elict a second glance.

*Buckaroo* wrote:

taipan wrote:

embee wrote:Isn't Buck only racist to counter the whiteys who are all racist and cover their racism by not saying or doing anything racist?

So logically his racist comments prove his non racism as only tue non racists can safely use racist comments, thereby proving their non racism.

the key to discerning racist from non-racist comments is the intention of the speaker.

Mandela calling his fellow Africans as 'Kaffir' wouldn't elict a second glance.

So you and only you can discern this?

It is upon the subject in each case to discern the neutrality of the speaker.

If the subject does not take offence, then there is no case.