First Thing Tasted?
-
@Veet Ugh spare me if you aren't going to actually response to the points instead of just saying you don't like them, please don't reply to me.
I don't think you know what poser means.
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
wow, not only are you arrogant, you ignorant too ... why don't you read-up on her, and how she fasted, before spewing your putrid puke all over this thread ... your profile name seems rather apt now - "tonyshowoff" ... POSER !!
What do you mean? She was on an IV drip, correct? What are we missing about the case?
-
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
wow, not only are you arrogant, you ignorant too ... why don't you read-up on her, and how she fasted, before spewing your putrid puke all over this thread ... your profile name seems rather apt now - "tonyshowoff" ... POSER !!
What do you mean? She was on an IV drip, correct? What are we missing about the case?
Yep, which was forced into her ...
-
Maybe the news article was incorrect, but the BBC article clearly said she was fed and not hungry. If the BBC is lying, well sure, but how did she last so long?
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
wow, not only are you arrogant, you ignorant too ... why don't you read-up on her, and how she fasted, before spewing your putrid puke all over this thread ... your profile name seems rather apt now - "tonyshowoff" ... POSER !!
What do you mean? She was on an IV drip, correct? What are we missing about the case?
Yep, which was forced into her ...
Understood. But the issue would be that she was forced to end the hungry strike then, not that she was still on one. It's only a hunger strike as long as she isn't getting nourishment.
I'm sure it's part cultural, in the west hunger strikes are not seen as a serious thing and intentional suicide is considered both illegal and unethical making doing one.... not a means of supporting a cause but a means of trivializing it.
It's seen as attention seeking for the individual, not a means to support some greater cause.
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
wow, not only are you arrogant, you ignorant too ... why don't you read-up on her, and how she fasted, before spewing your putrid puke all over this thread ... your profile name seems rather apt now - "tonyshowoff" ... POSER !!
What do you mean? She was on an IV drip, correct? What are we missing about the case?
Yep, which was forced into her ...
Did you observe someone forcing an IV drip into her with your own eyes? Or do you simply believe everything you read?
-
Here's a woman who has had anorexia for 10 years, that's roughly only 2/3rds the amount of time, and she's had food and IVs forced on her as well:
Explain to me how this woman lasted 16 years and is pretty damn healthy looking.
Plus IV drips won't make you plump and healthy, that's not how they work.
-
@RojoLoco said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
wow, not only are you arrogant, you ignorant too ... why don't you read-up on her, and how she fasted, before spewing your putrid puke all over this thread ... your profile name seems rather apt now - "tonyshowoff" ... POSER !!
What do you mean? She was on an IV drip, correct? What are we missing about the case?
Yep, which was forced into her ...
Did you observe someone forcing an IV drip into her with your own eyes? Or do you simply believe everything you read?
This is what I mean with the believing frauds blindly, I read this stuff in Russian and Hungarian all the time on other forums. If there's a problem with their story, they make something up, nevermind they almost never provide proof and even if it is true rarely does it actually answer the issues at hand. For example, how can an IV make someone so healthy when it's mostly just water? Yeah.
-
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
OK that makes more sense than an IV drip.
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
Same in the US, which is why it is seen as an act of selfishness and self-aggrandizement and an act against the thing that they claim to support. It's seen as someone attempting to capitalize on the suffering of others. Just an attention seeking problem. It doesn't make people feel sorry or change their minds, it makes them upset about how selfish that person is being. It doesn't draw attention to the law that needs to be changed, it draws attention to the individual.
-
@tonyshowoff said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
OK that makes more sense than an IV drip.
Yes, definitely a terminology problem there. I had heard IV and I thought for sure that I had seen IV in the news. But a tube makes way more sense.
-
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@tonyshowoff said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
OK that makes more sense than an IV drip.
Yes, definitely a terminology problem there. I had heard IV and I thought for sure that I had seen IV in the news. But a tube makes way more sense.
I'm glad ... you guys should get your facts right, before judging ..
-
The bottom line is, because of human nature, anyone who purports to protest some great injustice in the world is actually just doing it for the attention. There is no such thing as true altruism, it is only used for self promotion. If she wanted to change some law, why not attempt to do that via political means (which might actually have some effect on the issue) instead of pulling a 16 year publicity stunt (oh, look at me! I'm so dedicated to this cause! ME ME ME ME ME ME ME!!!!!!)?
-
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
Same in the US, which is why it is seen as an act of selfishness and self-aggrandizement and an act against the thing that they claim to support. It's seen as someone attempting to capitalize on the suffering of others. Just an attention seeking problem. It doesn't make people feel sorry or change their minds, it makes them upset about how selfish that person is being. It doesn't draw attention to the law that needs to be changed, it draws attention to the individual.
As I pointed out, it didn't help, the law still exists, and if anything she may hurt it long term or make it harder to get rid of. Obviously if forced to eat by feeding tube, at that point she should've realised she was wasting her time. Going in the politics makes a hell of a lot more sense. She has hurt her cause, either by bad association with her style of indirect action or by waiting so long to get into politics and maybe do something useful.
And let's say her being forced does not count against her hunger strike, fine, but she's still not fasting if she's quit, so I'm not sure where you get that claim.
-
I probably just imagined it or something. BBC has good info here: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37007494
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@tonyshowoff said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
OK that makes more sense than an IV drip.
Yes, definitely a terminology problem there. I had heard IV and I thought for sure that I had seen IV in the news. But a tube makes way more sense.
I'm glad ... you guys should get your facts right, before judging ..
The facts aren't important, because her supporters aren't going around saying "she ended her 16 year fast/hunger strike-which-she-actually-had-a-feeding-tube-so-its-not-really-that-amazing" they're leaving that last part out making it seem much more wondrous. Again, hurting, not helping.
-
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
Same in the US, which is why it is seen as an act of selfishness and self-aggrandizement and an act against the thing that they claim to support. It's seen as someone attempting to capitalize on the suffering of others. Just an attention seeking problem. It doesn't make people feel sorry or change their minds, it makes them upset about how selfish that person is being. It doesn't draw attention to the law that needs to be changed, it draws attention to the individual.
Thanks to Irom, the issue did get some attention ... She inspired other around the country to take-up this cause .. If not in her state, the govt. did withdraw AFSPA from several other regions ..
What saddens me is how some of you guys , were so quick to to call her a fake, without getting the fact straight... No one even cared about the sacrifice this person has made.
-
@Veet You can't defend her fast as absolute (and even still in progress, oddly enough), then when called on it back off to talk about forced feeding tubes. If you cared about facts, why didn't you mention that from the beginning?
-
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
@scottalanmiller said in First Thing Tasted?:
@Veet said in First Thing Tasted?:
she was put under-arrest, but was in a hospital, with a Ryles tube which went directly into her stomach, through which she was fed a form of rice slurry ... all this against her will, cause as per Indian law, going on a hunger strike is akin to suicide, which is a crime ...
Same in the US, which is why it is seen as an act of selfishness and self-aggrandizement and an act against the thing that they claim to support. It's seen as someone attempting to capitalize on the suffering of others. Just an attention seeking problem. It doesn't make people feel sorry or change their minds, it makes them upset about how selfish that person is being. It doesn't draw attention to the law that needs to be changed, it draws attention to the individual.
Thanks to Irom, the issue did get some attention ... She inspired other around the country to take-up this cause .. If not in her state, the govt. did withdraw AFSPA from several other regions ..
What saddens me is how some of you guys , were so quick to to call her a fake, without getting the fact straight... No one even cared about the sacrifice this person has made.
Nobody asked her to make any sacrifice, she did that for her own self-aggrandizement. The human ego is a bizarre thing. Anyone who actually makes a sacrifice to make the world a better place goes unseen, because they don't need to be seen "doing the right thing"... They simply do it, without alerting the press or raising a big hullabaloo.
So remember kids, those people that tell you they are making the world a better place by their own self sacrifice have an agenda, and they are charlatans.
