From: u925979@postoffice.utas.edu.au (Hee Poh)
Subject: Re: Posting Religious Articles on the Soc.Culture
Organization: University of Tasmania
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 07:27:42 GMT

Mr.Othman,

I am sorry if I do make this too "open".

There is one thing I can't agree with you. If you keep on breaking people's speeches
and trying to "construct" another story of your own, there will be no chance 
at all for you to understand people's thinking.I have a word for you. You 
have been over-reacted at most of the time. You are so "sensitive" and 
"extreme", maybe to me ONLY.

First of all, let me remind you. The articles that I wrote should be read with
the whole peice, not a particular paragraph or sentence, if you want to "know"
their meanings. I think this is also true for some others. Another point is, 
you must provide correct views to support your arguments. The only thing you
have done so far is by looking at some words of people's articles, and point-
ing your finger straight away at them and arguing without any points, and that's it. 
You can say whatever you like in a sense that you have "modified" people's words. 
You are very likely to say/yell that I am absolutely wrong. Somehow I can tell you,
AGAIN, think properly and deeply, if you want to argu, be sensible. It would be very
much appreciated if you did.

Now, let me get it clear for you. 

Firstly, the last "phase" in my latest posting.
As I normally did and do, I like to put some words at the end of my posting.
However it is just something I think that might be a joke. That is, most of the
time, I don't think people will put too much attention on this. Somehow you did.
What a surprised! The only thing I can do and would like to do now is to say, 
"I didn't mean to mean what you think. I am sorry for that." 
However, this proves that you are so "sensitive" and "extreme". And you seem to 
know what the hell is.

If you think all the people should have a better understanding of your religion,
why not do your religion a favour, spread the TRUTH out. You can do it in this
column. Everyone is free enough to say and post everything. But I may like to 
tell you one thing, there are some good views of the other religions too. Have 
you ever listened to them? 

I believe in myself more than anything else. Somehow I did and do listen to my 
friends who are Christians, Hindus, Muslims, Budhists and some other who are from 
the Middle-east and Europe. What can I say other than that every religion is good 
for its people. And in fact, it does generally.

Somewhat when we talked about the wars between two different religions, what can 
you tell me then? Which side is the holy one? And which one was doing the right 
thing? As you are doing a science degree, you should have understood the basic
rules of the Relativity. Based on certain conditions, noone was right. So, in 
conclusion to your case, I find that you have no place in you to "acommodate" or
admit the good behaviour of others, particularly the one who is not a Muslim. 

The last thing is, it is understood that if someone don't include his previous
articles in one's latest posting, you as a reader should look up from the past
postings in order to find out. Is this in common sense? I do think it is. But I 
am not sure about you, my "lovely" friend.

If you think you are totally right and wrong at nothing, then I will be the "bad-man".
What can I do other than apologizing and begging for pardon.

Here is a phase : The one who sits still and does not say much,
                              doesn't mean that he is mute or thoughtless.

>From an authur in the past,
                           I feel sad not because of my failure, (a king lost in a war)
                             But the misunderstanding of my people.

                           I am not blaming them for their "blindness", 
			                                      (his people were persuaded by other kingdoms)
                             But the failure of not caring them.

                           The worst is not that the war between kingdoms,
             
                             But among my people.

Maybe these words are not revelent to this argument, that is something defferent in 
different mind.

Lastly, I would say that the reason I am writing this so "impolitely" because I can't
accept the way you intepreted people's words. In some ways, your argunents are
ridiculous. You hit your own mouth by your own words.
  eg:
           :It would be polite if you accompany the text where you think someone has
           :re-interpeted someone's speech or not. This usenet is not spoken media, it is
           :written and recorded for ever.

If this is recorded permanently, what is the point of copying down the words once more.
If you copied the entire copy, that might be a right thing to do so. But you did not.
You copied only the parts that you could argu about, but without logical reasoning
And if these articles can be found in the same column, why not just type your views in
and minimise the cost of money, space and time. AND do you know that, it costs a bit time 
to discover the correct way to read your articles.  Gouz!

HP.
Seems that the world is...
Life is short. Play hard.  Reebok.    Heerh!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.asean