What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
it's only news when "hindustan times" reports it :rofl::rofl:



so much for "accession".........how much progress they made since then on occupied Kashmir :lol::lol::lol:


i dont think hindustan will succeed in subjugating them (the Kashmiri people)
 
  • Like
Reactions: SQ8
There is a very nice thread already existing on this forum started by RoadRunner you can find all the truth about this "succession" "acceding" there.

All bhartis lies are busted there.
 
All happening because Obama is coming, plus Common Wealth game. India govt has imposed news blackout on Kashmir uprising.
 
and where is it?? (part highlighted in red)
Also the raja did not control the whole of disputed territory at the time of partition so how the heck he acceded something he did not govern?

That was because Pakistan decided to send in militants and its regulars dressed as militants to apparently "help" the Islamic rebels who wanted to join Pakistan but actually with a motive to grab the territory . Since the Maharaja's forces could not fight them, he turned, naturally, to India. And the rest is history.

Junagadh and Sikkim are to India what baluchistan is to Pakistan, difference being there is no demand for freedom in Junagadh and Sikkim. Secondly these are NOT what you people consider to be 'disputed' territories.
 
Kashmir is NOT part of India. Kashmir is country that is Troubled by India by invading it.

Kashmir struggle starts from the days of the tyrant Raja not 87.


And for curfews you need to check the facts.

Actually it was Pakistan who first set foot into the then independent Kashmir. Disprove me if you can. India's action was a reaction to what Pakistan initiated.

Its you who needs to get your facts right, my fair lady.
 
The people in the country can view the affairs of the country only from the eyes for the journalists. If the journalists are half jacked up on their hallucinations, then God save the readers! Even if they dream of having some readers, they would be as crazy as the person who writes it.

Anyways, regarding the question of peblicite, the conditions that were mutually agreed for conducting it doesn't exist anymore so there won't be a peblicite. So there won't be a peblicite anymore as India won't be accepting it. (Just common sense! For those who claim to be journalists and can't understand I can't help u.)

back to topic:

the reason for putting curfew is obvious as they turn into violent protests. It is to protect the public property. As they come running next day shouting that they don't even get basic infrastructure. Come on if they keep on destroying their public property who will rebuild it.
 
The people in the country can view the affairs of the country only from the eyes for the journalists. If the journalists are half jacked up on their hallucinations, then God save the readers! Even if they dream of having some readers, they would be as crazy as the person who writes it.

Anyways, regarding the question of peblicite, the conditions that were mutually agreed for conducting it doesn't exist anymore so there won't be a peblicite. So there won't be a peblicite anymore as India won't be accepting it. (Just common sense! For those who claim to be journalists and can't understand I can't help u.)

back to topic:

the reason for putting curfew is obvious as they turn into violent protests. It is to protect the public property. As they come running next day shouting that they don't even get basic infrastructure. Come on if they keep on destroying their public property who will rebuild it.

Sir, if they had basic infrastructure (i.e. if you took care of them properly), they wouldn't be protesting to destroy the little that you have given them.
 
Actually it was Pakistan who first set foot into the then independent Kashmir. Disprove me if you can. India's action was a reaction to what Pakistan initiated.

Its you who needs to get your facts right, my fair lady.

Can you comment on what happened in Junagadh and other princely states willing to join Pakistan but had hindu majority? And how come the rule applied to them was an exception to Kashmir?

If you hadn't cheated, we wouldn't have to fight a war.

Anyhow, Pakistan or India, Kashmir isn't happy with the things the way they are. Whether they want to join Pakistan or not, they're sympathetic to our cause as we are to theirs.
 
Sir, if they had basic infrastructure (i.e. if you took care of them properly), they wouldn't be protesting to destroy the little that you have given them.

What 'basic' infrastructure are you talking about? have you visited Srinagar or other parts of Kashmir? Infact the valley is much more developed than other parts of the state which happen to be under Pakistan's control. It had a roaring tourist business untill things turned ugly in '89 and then much recently untill 4 months back.

The "instigators" for unrest cannot seem to digest the fact that Kashmiris are doing well for themselves as a state in India.
 
Once the force is use to press the mass uprising, then its sign of freedom. Freedom movement turn violent the day Indian forces fire first bullet on protest.
 
Can you comment on what happened in Junagadh and other princely states willing to join Pakistan but had hindu majority? And how come the rule applied to them was an exception to Kashmir?
Before hyphenating Junagarh with Kashmir, as is the wont of many a uninitiated members, it would be wise to check the history of the issue.

Here's some fodder for thought:
On September 15, 1947, Nawab Mohammad Mahabat Khanji III of Junagadh, a princely state located on the south-western end of Gujarat and having no common border with Pakistan, chose to accede to Pakistan ignoring Mountbatten's views, arguing that Junagadh adjoined Pakistan by sea. The rulers of two states that were subject to the suzerainty of Junagadh — Mangrol and Babariawad — reacted by declaring their independence from Junagadh and acceding to India. In response, the nawab of Junagadh militarily occupied the two states. Rulers of the other neighbouring states reacted angrily, sending troops to the Junagadh frontier, and appealed to the Government of India for assistance. A group of Junagadhi people, led by Samaldas Gandhi, formed a government-in-exile, the Aarzi Hukumat ("temporary government").[8]
India believed that if Junagadh was permitted to accede to Pakistan, communal tension already simmering in Gujarat would worsen, and refused to accept the Nawab's choice of accession. The government pointed out that the state was 80% Hindu, and called for a plebiscite to decide the question of accession. India cut off supplies of fuel and coal to Junagadh, severed air and postal links, sent troops to the frontier, and occupied the principalities of Mangrol and Babariawad that had acceded to India.[9]
You see what the problem was? And I was suspended for saying this!!
If you hadn't cheated, we wouldn't have to fight a war.
How is that cheating? Where did India cheat? Care to elaborate?
Anyhow, Pakistan or India, Kashmir isn't happy with the things the way they are. Whether they want to join Pakistan or not, they're sympathetic to our cause as we are to theirs.
How are they sympathetic to your cause? Those idiots have no idea what they are doing! They are just being getting carried away by sentiments and adrenalin. They have no practical knowledge of what would happen if the status quo changes - forcibly!
 
Kashmir is NOT part of India. Kashmir is country that is Troubled by India by invading it.

Kashmir struggle starts from the days of the tyrant Raja not 87.


And for curfews you need to check the facts.

we never invaded Kashmir but stoped you from invading it . In 1947 pakistan tried to invade J&K then the king asked the help of India and after the war the king has joined India .

the day you stop sponsoring terrorism Kashmir will live in peace with out any army personal marching the streets
 
all the people of Pakistan can you tell me why did Pakistan attacked J&K in 1947???
because India entered into J&K only after it was asked help by the King of J&K and which the King agreed to join the united India
 
all the people of Pakistan can you tell me why did Pakistan attacked J&K in 1947???
because India entered into J&K only after it was asked help by the King of J&K and which the King agreed to join the united India

Please tell me why India took Junagadh even though its prince said that he wanted to be with Pakistan?

Okay, fine, take all other princely states that said they want to be with Pakistan (you already did)- but Kashmir is ours on that term.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom