Bigots

[singh2]

"the history of nazi Germany of past"

by saying 'the history of' in front of 'nazi germany of past' you are implying you saw something firsthand, which has since passed into history. your comment also implies there is a modern nazi germany in place of the old one.

do not break the sentence. REad it fully below

I lived in West Germany for some years and saw the history of nazi Germany of past with my own eyes.

The meaning is very obvious. Your so called knowledge is failing you as there was no west germany in Hitler's time.

The same thing happened when you failed to comprehend a simple sentence of English regarding women voting rights in UK presuming that you were being called a woman. before flaunting your supoerior knowledge of english which itself is an unsikh act try to learn english.

[HSD1]

The meaning is very obvious. Your so called knowledge is failing you as there was no west germany in Hitler's time.

you see that word in the middle of the sentence: 'and'? well that means you can express two different points. one point about having lived in W.germany, and another about having experienced what happened before firsthand. as for the question about women, you worded it badly (and dont go editting that post now that i've pointed it out). you also didnt explain why you asked such a random question or explain what you are trying to achieve with you ignorance.

[HSD1]

Your so called mastery of history is failing you as there was no west germany in Hitler's time.

i never said there was. another unbelievably faulty and misinformed assumption on your part.

[singh2]

you see that word in the middle of the sentence: 'and'? well that means you can express two different points. one point about having lived in W.germany, and another about having experienced what happened before firsthand. as for the question about women, you worded it badly (and dont go editting that post now that i've pointed it out). you also didnt explain why you asked such a random question or explain what you are trying to achieve with you ignorance.

Now you are caught lying. i did not edit that post in which i asked you when were women given voting rights in UK. Here is that post given for you to see. it is still unedited. Sikhs are known to maintain some ethics.

http://www.sikhawareness.com//index.php?showtopic=11801&st=30

By HSD

all right, all right, we can all see that you're very good at repeating what others say. explains a lot.

Response by singh2

When were women allowed to vote in UK the country of your residence?

Edited September 6, 2009 by singh2

[HSD1]

Now you are caught lying. i did not edit that post in which i asked you when were women given voting rights in UK. Here is that post given for you to see. it is still unedited. Sikhs are known to maintain some ethics.

did i say you edited it? no - i told you not to go and change it like you did with other posts. once again you have been proved to have such ignorance and bad levels of english that you cannot even comprehend simple sentences let alone type one. and sikhs are known to maintain some ethics? well you're not a sikh then. and what does it say for non-sikhs? stop being a bigot. there are many non-sikhs who are better humans than you.

and your question about women voting, as well as being entirely random, was worded so badly, most probably on purpose. that way you can spin my replies and drag out your pathetic ideas.

[singh2]

did i say you edited it? no - i told you not to go and change it like you did with other posts. once again you have been proved to have such ignorance and bad levels of english that you cannot even comprehend simple sentences let alone type one. and sikhs are known to maintain some ethics? well you're not a sikh then. and what does it say for non-sikhs? stop being a bigot. there are many non-sikhs who are better humans than you.

and your question about women voting, as well as being entirely random, was worded so badly, most probably on purpose. that way you can spin my replies and drag out your pathetic ideas.

Before pointing out mistakes in my writing you better look at how you write. This is not the way journalists write. Journalists also do not hurl abuses as you do. i did not write anything in respect of non-sikhs. I wrote that there is a difference between living as a sikh with saroop and a sikh without saroop. before cooking up stories better understand what is written. Have a nice day

[HSD1]

Before pointing out mistakes in my writing you better look at how you write. This is not the way journalists write. Journalists also do not hurl abuses as you do. i did not write anything in respect of non-sikhs. I wrote that there is a difference between living as a sikh with saroop and a sikh without saroop. before cooking up stories better understand what is written. Have a nice day

wow! finally you admit you make mistakes, and what big ones as well. we can all see you are a bigot now, especially with how you view non-sikhs. as you're not a journalist and you dont know much about many things, the rest of your post is irrelevant posturing on your part.

[ishvar2]

HSD,

Please start your sentences with a capital letter.

Thanks.

[HSD1]

HSD,

Please start your sentences with a capital letter.

Thanks.

why, can't you understand them otherwise?

[singh2]

wow! finally you admit you make mistakes, and what big ones as well. we can all see you are a bigot now, especially with how you view non-sikhs. as you're not a journalist and you dont know much about many things, the rest of your post is irrelevant posturing on your part.

You have problems in understanding English also. Read what i wrote in my previous post.

[singh2]

why, can't you understand them otherwise?

He can understand it. But he is going per your rule.

[HSD1]

You have problems in understanding English also. Read what i wrote in my previous post.

i did. it is clear your english is unbelievably basic.

He can understand it. But he is going per your rule.

what rule? i never mentioned any. if you want to be pedantic about grammar, then i could have ripped apart most of your posts on that basis alone. but i chose to ignore most of your typos, and only went on about those sentences you had constructed in order to deliberately twist my points. you are no engineer, as most engineers listen to sound advice. you must be a rubbish engineer with an attitude like yours.

[singh2]

i did. it is clear your english is unbelievably basic.

what rule? i never mentioned any. if you want to be pedantic about grammar, then i could have ripped apart most of your posts on that basis alone. but i chose to ignore most of your typos, and only went on about those sentences you had constructed in order to deliberately twist my points. you are no engineer, as most engineers listen to sound advice. you must be a rubbish engineer with an attitude like yours.

Instead of lying repeatedly can you point out a post where i cursed non-sikhs. If not take your words back.

I wrote in my 2nd post that your post replete with abuses is worth not to read even. I never flaunted my credentials. I revealed when you asked for those. To ask that itself shows lack of immaturity.

You seem to be a genius but try to rise above using abusive language while conducting yourself on a public forum.

[ishvar2]

why, can't you understand them otherwise?

Not really, it's just that I have an aversion to poorly written english, especially if it is by a journalist that is pulling up others on quality of their english.

[ishvar2]

Mods there is nothing of value in this topic any more - including my posts!

It's getting overly personal and off topic.

[HSD1]

Instead of lying repeatedly can you point out a post where i cursed non-sikhs. If not take your words back.

did i say you cursed them? i said you imply that non-sikhs use low language, are stupid etc. maybe you should just watch what you say and think that if its not worded well it can cause issues.

I wrote in my 2nd post that your post replete with abuses is worth not to read even. I never flaunted my credentials. I revealed when you asked for those. To ask that itself shows lack of immaturity.

my post is 'replete with abuse'? there were a few in that post but it was hardly overflowing with them. and thank you for complimenting me on my lack of immaturity. one of us has to be the adult here.

You seem to be a genius but try to rise above using abusive language while conducting yourself on a public forum.

do you know or experienced what this 'cul' is like? he hysterically spouts his own misinterpretations again and again. on the jeendan kaur thread, he attacked me and sikhs in general for no reason. he does it elsewhere aswell.

Not really, it's just that I have an aversion to poorly written english, especially if it is by a journalist that is pulling up others on quality of their english.

i just realised i havent put capitals at the start of any sentences in my posts. my bad. i shouldnt have got so used to autocorrect on MSword.

[Guest]

Topic locked due to personal tu tu mein mein, which can be carried via pm between two parties. Sent me pm if anyone else like to share their input, i ll unlock the thread.