How many Indian cricketers have jumped in so far to be part of Twitter war against Shahid Afridi?

[Saj]

How about an Indian-free section for all of us non-Indian PPers? Can you just imagine the satisfaction and enjoyment of having meaningful and interesting discussions on topics unrelated to the Indian/Pakistani bashing of each other, without having every thread being diverted to being an Indian/Pakistani ding dong?

I just think one of the appeals of PakPassion is that it's a diverse community where all nationalities are free to speak on all topics.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Gambhir is a nationalist, but he is a university graduate and is known for his strong opinions on political issues. He is clearly a more credible source than someone like Afridi.

As far as Dhawan is concerned, there was nothing wrong in what he said. Afridi has no business poking his nose in other countries when his own country is lagging behind India by an embarrassing margin.

Ideally, Dhawan and others should have ignored completely because Afridi's views on these issues are of no significance whatsoever. Nonetheless, Dhawan did not say anything in appropriate.

However, Gambhir was condescending and it appears that he is not going to take that 11 year old chip of his shoulder as far as Afridi is concerned.

Pakistan has far bigger issues than fighting for the rights of J&K. If Afridi cares so strongly about human rights, why doesn't he do something for Balochistan and the religious minorities in Pakistan?

I am not apologizing for India and Israel - I simply do not care much about Palestine and J&K. I would rather have our own house fixed first, and as long as we continue to do what we are doing, we have absolutely no right to talk about India and Israel without looking like blithering hypocrites.

Having a strong opinion on political issues does not make it a correct opinion. How does having a college degree make him a credible source? Guy can't spell 19 and you've criticised Afridi's English Afridi caring about Kashmir does not mean he should care similarly about Syria or Baluchistan or Palestine or Iraq etc. He can choose what to care about and if anyone responds calling him a ret ard that is that guy's issue, not Afridi's

 

[Mamoon]

Having a strong opinion on political issues does not make it a correct opinion. How does having a college degree make him a credible source? Guy can't spell 19 and you've criticised Afridi's English Afridi caring about Kashmir does not mean he should care similarly about Syria or Baluchistan or Palestine or Iraq etc. He can choose what to care about and if anyone responds calling him a ret ard that is that guy's issue, not Afridi's

Having a degree means he is more inclined towards have an interest in current affairs, politics etc. An educated person is more likely to have an informed opinion on these topics than an illiterate individual like Afridi.

Gambir is actually quite an articulate and well-spoken individual if you listen to his interviews. He is at a completely different level to Afridi, and as I said earlier, if you put the two face to face and ask them to debate the Kashmir issue with mics in their hands, Afridi will be embarrassed beyond measure.

Finally, I did not criticize Afridi's English to sound pedantic. I just think it is funny to see his social media team use words that would fly above his head and talk about a political issue on his behalf that is clearly well above his capacity. I would be surprised if he knows more than what the Pakistani propaganda has fed the nation over the years; I really don't think he is well-informed on this topic at any level.

Yes Afridi can choose what to care about, but if he will show hypocrisy than he will be called out on it. Same goes for everyone.

 

[Adijazz1706]

Having a degree means he is more inclined towards have an interest in current affairs, politics etc. An educated person is more likely to have an informed opinion on these topics than an illiterate individual like Afridi.

Gambir is actually quite an articulate and well-spoken individual if you listen to his interviews. He is at a completely different level to Afridi, and as I said earlier, if you put the two face to face and ask them to debate the Kashmir issue with mics in their hands, Afridi will be embarrassed beyond measure.

Finally, I did not criticize Afridi's English to sound pedantic. I just think it is funny to see his social media team use words that would fly above his head and talk about a political issue on his behalf that is clearly well above his capacity. I would be surprised if he knows more than what the Pakistani propaganda has fed the nation over the years; I really don't think he is well-informed on this topic at any level.

Yes Afridi can choose what to care about, but if he will show hypocrisy than he will be called out on it. Same goes for everyone.

Gambhir can articulate better in English which does not mean much if he speaks drivel which he usually does. Having a college degree does not make on intelligent nor is being illiterate a sign of 'retardedness' as Gambhir put it

 

[blackanhyellow]

Having a degree means he is more inclined towards have an interest in current affairs, politics etc. An educated person is more likely to have an informed opinion on these topics than an illiterate individual like Afridi.

Gambir is actually quite an articulate and well-spoken individual if you listen to his interviews. He is at a completely different level to Afridi, and as I said earlier, if you put the two face to face and ask them to debate the Kashmir issue with mics in their hands, Afridi will be embarrassed beyond measure.

Finally, I did not criticize Afridi's English to sound pedantic. I just think it is funny to see his social media team use words that would fly above his head and talk about a political issue on his behalf that is clearly well above his capacity. I would be surprised if he knows more than what the Pakistani propaganda has fed the nation over the years; I really don't think he is well-informed on this topic at any level.

Yes Afridi can choose what to care about, but if he will show hypocrisy than he will be called out on it. Same goes for everyone.

Western celebrities champion causes, I doubt many of them know everything about the issues they are advocating. For example, if a celebrity says they support education for girls in developing countries, many won't know the statistics, or have spoken directly with girls from those countries, etc... But they support the cause because the little they do know about it, in theory is a good cause.

Similarly, Gambhir was not the only Indian cricketer that replied to Afridi, Dhawan and so many others did. I highly doubt most of them know much about the conflict, other than how their great army is eradicating terrorism. Do they know the root causes about the freedom struggle there? Do they know the statistics of the people that want freedom from India? Do they know all the human rights abuses that the army conducts?

Also, to be fair, Gambhir would only know what Indian media reports. Biased propaganda is hardly knowing about a subject.

But yes, Afridi should be a PHD in the subject to voice his opinion. Because Pakistanis want someone fully versed in English, be a scholar on the topic to voice any concern.

 

[Mamoon]

Western celebrities champion causes, I doubt many of them know everything about the issues they are advocating. For example, if a celebrity says they support education for girls in developing countries, many won't know the statistics, or have spoken directly with girls from those countries, etc... But they support the cause because the little they do know about it, in theory is a good cause.

Similarly, Gambhir was not the only Indian cricketer that replied to Afridi, Dhawan and so many others did. I highly doubt most of them know much about the conflict, other than how their great army is eradicating terrorism. Do they know the root causes about the freedom struggle there? Do they know the statistics of the people that want freedom from India? Do they know all the human rights abuses that the army conducts?

Also, to be fair, Gambhir would only know what Indian media reports. Biased propaganda is hardly knowing about a subject.

But yes, Afridi should be a PHD in the subject to voice his opinion. Because Pakistanis want someone fully versed in English, be a scholar on the topic to voice any concern.

I think supporting a cause is not the same as passing judgement on a geopolitical conflict. Afridi can certainly support the cause of the Kashmiri people, but his Twitter guy called the Indian government an "offensive regime" and also brought UN to the table to make his opinion sound credible.

On what authority is Afridi calling then Indian government an offensive regime? I would have the same stance if Sehwag or some other troll from Indian cricket criticizes our government over Balochistan or the oppression of the minorities (Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus etc.), or for being incapable of eradicating militant groups from the roots.

It was not Afridi's place to talk about this issue. India should have known better and not responded to his statement. As far as Dhawan is concerned, he did not even talk about the Kashmir issue. He rightfully pointed out that Afridi would be better off focusing on the problems in Pakistan before looking east.

 

[Rishta Aunty]

My bigger question is how the media in India get so rabidly nationalist? They seem to be driving this frenzy; it's almost like they need everything to be a crisis for TRP's or whatever. This is definitely something that has changed recently; even as far back as 10 years ago, the channels were pretty responsible and even made efforts towards reconciliation between the countries.

Afridi expressed his opinion, that is shared by pretty much 90% of all Pakistanis as it's part of the state consciousness. But why is that getting so much traction as to asking current players what they think and what not on TV? My Indian friend sent me a screenshot of an Indian news channel ('Something' Now) which was effectively questioning Dhoni and Sachin's nationalism since they hadn't come out and blasted Afridi yet.

If I were an Indian I'd be really worried right now; this kind of radicalization of national opinion was exactly what we went through under Zia.

Any (ideally non-jingoistic) Indian posters can comment on this?

 

[Abdullah719]

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Kashmir issues needs to be resolved as per Kashmiri people wishes & both side of governments needs to address that within the parameters of UN resolution human life is important either it’s Muslim or no Muslim plz learn to love each other not hate ..</p>— Shoaib Akhtar (@shoaib100mph) <a href="https://twitter.com/shoaib100mph/status/982640533972676608?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 7, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Yossarian]

I just think one of the appeals of PakPassion is that it's a diverse community where all nationalities are free to speak on all topics.

Of course. But to have virtually every thread on virtually any and every topic turned into a 'who can sling the most mud at the others country/peoples' can be depressing at times (to be fair, from both sides posters. Although one side's posters appear to have the capacity be critical of their own country/politicians, whist the sides usual suspects ....... I think you know what I mean). Ah well ... just a thought .... I suppose when one's had enough of this constant chest thumping from the aforementioned, then perhaps one should contemplate moving onto pastures anew

 

[Yossarian]

I think supporting a cause is not the same as passing judgement on a geopolitical conflict. Afridi can certainly support the cause of the Kashmiri people, but his Twitter guy called the Indian government an "offensive regime" and also brought UN to the table to make his opinion sound credible.

On what authority is Afridi calling then Indian government an offensive regime? I would have the same stance if Sehwag or some other troll from Indian cricket criticizes our government over Balochistan or the oppression of the minorities (Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus etc.), or for being incapable of eradicating militant groups from the roots.

It was not Afridi's place to talk about this issue. India should have known better and not responded to his statement. As far as Dhawan is concerned, he did not even talk about the Kashmir issue. He rightfully pointed out that Afridi would be better off focusing on the problems in Pakistan before looking east.

There's valid criticism of one's own side. And then there's wishful thinking that one was not from that side, and that fate had unjustly placed oneself on the wrong side, but pretending to couch it as valid criticism. You my friend do give the impression that it's the latter and not the former in your case.

 

[www787]

I think supporting a cause is not the same as passing judgement on a geopolitical conflict. Afridi can certainly support the cause of the Kashmiri people, but his Twitter guy called the Indian government an "offensive regime" and also brought UN to the table to make his opinion sound credible.

On what authority is Afridi calling then Indian government an offensive regime? I would have the same stance if Sehwag or some other troll from Indian cricket criticizes our government over Balochistan or the oppression of the minorities (Shias, Ahmadis, Hindus etc.), or for being incapable of eradicating militant groups from the roots.

It was not Afridi's place to talk about this issue. India should have known better and not responded to his statement. As far as Dhawan is concerned, he did not even talk about the Kashmir issue. He rightfully pointed out that Afridi would be better off focusing on the problems in Pakistan before looking east.

You do understand that UN can only hire limited number of people. And rest of the people can have their opinion.

Your posts are getting ridiculous.