What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
OK, this is getting ridiculous. Lets get one thing straight. Most people from IITs/IIMs DON'T HAVE A POLITICAL OPINION. They are not politically active, and don't care for whatever party that comes to power. Most of them don't have the time to worry about such issues. All they care about is their CVs and Jobs.

How do I know? I graduated from IIM Lucknow, class of 2009.

You want to see people who actively participate in politics, go to Delhi University, go to JNU etc and you'll find discussions on politics. In IITs/IIMs, all the discussion is focused on Theraja & Theraja, Kotler or ****. Seriously.

And that my friend calls for an applause...... :D

i can nothing but agree to it.....its just ppl are getting more and more involved in politics...not directly but definately indirectly.....

or i shud say in social aspect....and i feel beggining of politics starts with sociology !

- Student IIMK 2012 batch ! :cheers:
 
Who said Mirwise to go and adress the hindu pandits its just like Ringing a been in front of a buffalow

This makes him Mir-unwise !:rofl:

waise u can say the actual proverb...

BHAIS KE AAGE BEEN BAJAAI, BHAINS PADI PAGURAI !
 
back to the topic....

CAN ANY PAKISTANI PLZ EXPLAIN WHATS THE DEFINATION OF TERRORIST ?

I mean has RSS or Shiv sena or VHP ever had link in any havoc inside Pakistan ?

I mean do they ever found funding any bomb blast in pakistan....i wud love to see any link in that regard...any pakistani blog will also do!

but i feel that making this whole factor of Indian Terrorist is just to create a defence against the accusation put on pakistan for supporting those groups which either fund or are directly involved in terrorism in india....

No...i really mean it.......plz define Terrorism and plz give a rational and logical answer !

Thanks !
 
The resolutions do not stand nullified, they only stand unimplemented since India refuses to do so, despite committing to them earlier.

The only thing that language of Simla does is state the obvious, that any resolution of a dispute will have to be 'mutually agreed upon between them' - that potentially includes the UNSC resolutions at a future date, they are not nullified.

Exactly, and both parties can 'mutually agree between them' to implement the UNSC resolutions in some form as well, either as they stand currently, or with some changes/amendments.

Nothing in Simla nullifies the UNSC resolutions, it only emphasizes the obvious that any dispute resolution mechanism should be 'mutually agreed between the two countries'.

The sentence you are responding to has a qualifier - 'effectively'. Simla Agreement provides a legal basis to supersede UN resolutions therefore nullifying its operability, effectively, making these resolutions null.

Leaving aside the legal aspect of Simla Agreement, the UNSC resolutions can no longer be implemented today, forget the future, because the context and circumstances, which were the basis for the resolutions, have changed significantly. The resolutions are grossly inadequate to handle the current situation, unless, as you have indicated, 'some changes/amendments' are made to those or a completely new set of resolutions are drawn up. Neither, unfortunately, is possible.

As an aside, IWT and Sir Creek agreements create a legal obligation of sorts to 'mutually agree' to its contents. In other words, the parties had 'mutually agreed' at an earlier time, to 'mutually agree' to adhere to the agreements. UNSC resolutions do not create any legal obligation. Moreover, many resolutions weren't even 'mutually agreed' between the two parties. To consider the UNSC resolutions as having an equal legal standing with IWT and/or Sir Creek, is bad argument.
 
Amazing now echoes of Azaadi are being sounded in the Indian government. Shor Macha, Awaz utha, Kadam barha! It is significant that a senior Indian minister has come to his senses and is discussing terms of granting Azaadi to KAshmir.

---------- Post added at 06:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:01 PM ----------

On another note, I hope he too doesn't get slammed with sedition charges as its India's favorite charge these days.


I think the lovely weather in Dubai is making you ask for too much!

Somehow i have no doubt in my mind that Shiv Sena and RSS chest-thumpers will issue some not so very kind statements (threats), BJP will throw huge tantrum, and some conveniently timed corruption cases will be opened up against him

that, apart from the inevitable sedition charges themself.


indeed a brave admission by the minister, who has obviously come to grips with the ground realities in the occupied region
 
Perhaps you should study India's communal tensions some more, you obviously have plenty of contemporary events to analyze, rather than going all the way back to the hazy days of 1947.
The going back to the 'hazy days of 1947' was necessitated by your attempt to deny history.

Not at all, since the only thing your comment earlier pointed out was that certain parties hold a particular view, for whatever reason on the issue. It does not negate the validity of a plebiscite as a means of resolving the dispute, nor my earlier argument.
That, all those who had agreed to the mechanism of plebiscite as a means of resolving the dispute, no longer holds the same view, is illustrative of the invalidity of the mechanism in current context.

It went through the public opinion of the people of the Muslim majority States/provinces through electoral process, referendums and Jirgas - good enough for then.

Technically every State that ended up forming the contemporary nation of India did not get to 'go through the rigors of public opinion' on whether they wished to be made part of a single 'Indian Union' either.
Once again, the decision to partition India was that of ML, Congress, their groupies, all claiming to represent people's opinion, and of the British. There was never a referendum to verify and validate that decision, as was done in Canada in 1995.

Asking some people to chose between the two dominions, after the decision to create the dominions had already been made, is entirely different from asking them if at all there shall be two dominions to choose between.
 
You assert that the Congress, and the Left have a 'vicious' hatred for Indic civilisation. What and where did this come out?

That hatred clearly comes out in the poisonous distortions of history that are fed to innocent minds through official textbooks. A detailed analysis by Meenakshi Jain is available at:

http://voiceofdharma.org/indology/SatishChandra-flawed_history.doc

What are you referring to, except to the RSS' own self-pitying analysis? And since when did Boy Scouts go around killing people of a different religion?

Boy scouts don't, and neither does the RSS.

It might be educative to refer to my detailed response to the ubiquitous, perpetually frenzied Kartic Sri, and my statement that disliking the practised and rehearsed mob-violence of the RSS did not mean support for the Congress or the Left. Which part of that statement did you not understand?

You talk of the Taslima Nasreen incident, and the Congress government cowering and cancelling her visa. Where did you pick up the information that this cowardly behaviour was supported by anyone not supporting the Sangh? What, in short, do the two things have to do with each other?

Finally, when did the MIM become secularist? They are flagrantly communal, down to adopting the name of the faction behind the Razakars in Hyderabad, prior to the police action, and everyone knows they are communal, not secularist. Or is that your way of defaming secularism, by calling a known communal faction secular?

I'm sure the MIM piously proclaim themselves to be secular. I don't recall anybody from the Congress or Left disputing that assertion. I am just calling them by the label that most of the political parties seem to accept.
 
Farooq Abdullah is a bloody traitor to Kashmiris. He shell Insha' Allah meet his fate sooner then expected. Ameen.
 
God Bless Faarookh Abdullah Sahab. The Truest Leader of Jammu & Kashmir. Salute Sir.
 
Farooq Abdullah is a bloody traitor to Kashmiris. He shell Insha' Allah meet his fate sooner then expected. Ameen.

Why do we have such idiotic chest thumping in every thread? You do know that anyone can make such statements.

Syed Ali Shah Geelani is a bloody traitor to Kashmiris. He shall Insha' Allah meet his fate sooner then expected. Ameen.

There you go.
 
fnv8uh.jpg
 
Occupier can not be the Judge. You and your croonies are destined to be humiliated Soon Insha' Allah.
 
Back
Top Bottom