Advisor to Iran’s Ali Khamenei meets Jammu & Kashmir CM

[acid rain]

HI,

My question is still remains unanswered, What part of ISIS adhere to ISlamic teaching ?

The whole thing..did you read my post?..which part isn't about Islamic beliefs?.

 

[salarsikander]

The whole thing..did you read my post?..which part isn't about Islamic beliefs?.

HI,
All of it

 

[nForce]

Hi,

Well Clearly after the Fall of Hyderabad and failure on UN to take notice of it Is the very reason why the terms couldn't be agreed to.

Plus there was a massive trust deficit Btw both. So Blaming Pakistan entirely for that mater, clearly shows the biased opinion

Hyderabad has got nothing to do with Kashmir or Pakistan.
If you can't agree to UNSC Resolutions, then you should not be asking for plebiscite at all, isn't it ?

 

[acid rain]

HI,
All of it

Re-read this..


Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group is wrong.

 

[salarsikander]

Hyderabad has got nothing to do with Kashmir or Pakistan.
If you can't agree to UNSC Resolutions, then you should not be asking for plebiscite at all, isn't it ?

Hi,

Let me get this straight. When you are on negotiable table., you don't just blame the other party entirely, they too have justified concerns.

The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[33] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite. India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected. As a result, Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw. Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations ofGeneral Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

Re-read this..


Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group is wrong.

Hi,

The prophet methodology depended on showing compassion and mercy but not showing the extremist ideology, which is totally unislamic. Since everything is based around what they say, is the fact that they are rejecting the very fundamental teaching.

Quoting from random source without having background knowledge, shows that you will go to any length to prove your point, Which is ofc totally wrong

 

[acid rain]

Hi,

Let me get this straight. When you are on negotiable table., you don't just blame the other party entirely, they too have justified concerns.

The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[33] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite. India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected. As a result, Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw. Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations ofGeneral Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.


Hi,

The prophet methodology depended on showing compassion and mercy but not showing the extremist ideology, which is totally unislamic. Since everything is based around what they say, is the fact that they are rejecting the very fundamental teaching.

Quoting from random source without having background knowledge, shows that you will go to any length to prove your point, Which is ofc totally wrong

What source do you prefer?.

 

[salarsikander]

What source do you prefer?

Hi,

The source of Quran and Sunnah as Any other Muslim would

 

[acid rain]

Hi,

Let me get this straight. When you are on negotiable table., you don't just blame the other party entirely, they too have justified concerns.

The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[33] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite. India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected. As a result, Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw. Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations ofGeneral Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.


Hi,

The prophet methodology depended on showing compassion and mercy but not showing the extremist ideology, which is totally unislamic. Since everything is based around what they say, is the fact that they are rejecting the very fundamental teaching.

Quoting from random source without having background knowledge, shows that you will go to any length to prove your point, Which is ofc totally wrong

Millions of humans killed isn't exactly "peaceful"...hardly anything peaceful.

 

[Razia Sultana]

Hi,

Let me get this straight. When you are on negotiable table., you don't just blame the other party entirely, they too have justified concerns.

The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[33] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite. India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected. As a result, Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw. Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations ofGeneral Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

Nicely put up. all facts, no emotions.

 

[salarsikander]

Millions of humans killed isn't exactly "peaceful"...hardly anything peaceful.

Hi,

Hence which is Unislamic !

 

[mike2000 is back]

At least Iran delusional mullahs are now being pragmatic instead of indulging in their stupid/senseless idea of protecting 'oppressed' Muslims all over the world from 'oppression' by infidels. They are now thinking more about protecting their own national interests which is how things ought to be. So good to see they are getting closer to India and supporting India in Kashmir against 'Islamic/Muslim' brother Pakistan. Hopefully Iran will soon come to its senses about supporting terror groups like Hamas and Hezbollah against Israel just because they are so called 'oppressed' Muslims at the hands of infidel zionists. lool If that's the case then they cant justify their ties/support for India.

so Mullah accepted slave of Indian establishment and puppets true rulers of Kashmir? Mullah are worst then Satan..

National interests my friend, after the relief of sanctions , they are now coming to their senses. so i say good move. They should also adopt the same stand in Palestine and Lebanon and stop supporting terror groups there against Israel(which by the way is a very close friend of India, much more than Iran can ever be). That's geo politics for you.

 

[Dubious]

Re-read this..


Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group is wrong.

quoting RUBBISH and calling it Islamic? Isnt that called misleading and propagating BS?

@Slav Defence @waz @Manticore @Emmie @Jango @Adios Amigo @Horus

The whole thing..did you read my post?..which part isn't about Islamic beliefs?.

Post reported for BS

Esp when 99% of the world Muslims dont think so who the hell are you to say so? Some delusional psychopath?

 

[salarsikander]

That would be propagating isis ideology which is a banned topic in the forum.



As I said..no one believes that.

@Oscar @waz @Jungibaaz @Jango

In Spite of presenting him every logical argument. The typical hatred filled HINDU is clearly and unequivocally stating that Quran and Sunnah propagates ISIS Ideology. never Imagined an indian could stoop to such low level

reported for associating Quran with Terrorism and spreading Lies and disinformation

@syedali73 @Akheilos @Sage @DESERT FIGHTER @Zarvan @MastanKhan @Donatello @Menace2Society @Irfan Baloch @Aether @Secur @Arsalan @Windjammer @OTTOMAN @Shamain @IBRIS @Gufi @Slav Defence and all the other report this post as much as possible

 

[Dubious]

That would be propagating isis ideology which is a banned topic in the forum.

So ISIS is following Quran and Hadith? Typical brainwashed fool!

 

[nForce]

Hi,
Let me get this straight. When you are on negotiable table., you don't just blame the other party entirely, they too have justified concerns.

Giving it straight to you. Looking back at the history, do you think India has ever been willing to negotiate on Kashmir ? forget what Govt. of India says..
Negotiation essentially means to give up something for the sake of reconciliation. India much bigger a power and it will never negotiate with Pakistan on Kashmir. Plebiscite was the only chance that Pakistan ever had.

The resulting First Kashmir War lasted until 1948, when India sought resolution of the issue at the UN Security Council. Sheikh Abdullah was not in favour of India seeking UN intervention because he was sure the Indian Army could free the entire state from invaders. Following the set-up of the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan (UNCIP), the UN Security Council passed Resolution 47 on 21April 1948. The measure imposed an immediate cease-fire and called on the Government of Pakistan 'to secure the withdrawal from the state of Jammu and Kashmir of tribesmen and Pakistani nationals not normally resident therein who have entered the state for the purpose of fighting.' It also asked Government of India to reduce its forces to minimum strength, after which the circumstances for holding a plebiscite should be put into effect 'on the question of Accession of the state to India or Pakistan.' However, both India and Pakistan failed to arrive at a truce agreement due to differences over interpretation of the procedure for and the extent of demilitarisation. One sticking point was whether the Azad Kashmiri army was to be disbanded during the truce stage or at the plebiscite stage.

In November 1948, although both the Indian and Pakistani governments agreed to hold the plebiscite, the failure of Pakistan to withdraw its troops from Kashmir was a violation of the agreed conditions for holding it and the process stalled.[33] Furthermore, the Indian Government distanced itself from its previous commitment to hold a plebiscite. India then proposed that Pakistan withdraw all its troops first, calling it a precondition for a plebiscite. Pakistan rejected the proposal on the grounds that the Kashmiris would be unable to vote freely in the presence of the Indian army and in the light of the friendship between Sheikh Abdullah and Indian Prime Minister, Jawaharlal Nehru. However, Pakistan proposed simultaneous withdrawal of all troops followed by a plebiscite under international aegis, which India rejected. As a result, Pakistani forces did not unilaterally withdraw. Over the next few years, the UN Security Council passed four new resolutions, revising the terms of Resolution 47 to include a synchronous withdrawal of both Indian and Pakistani troops from the region on the recommendations ofGeneral Andrew McNaughton. To this end, UN arbitrators put forward 11 different proposals for the demilitarisation of the region. All of these were accepted by Pakistan, but rejected by the Indian government.The resolutions were passed by the United Nations Security Council under Chapter VI of the United Nations Charter and as such are considered non-binding with no mandatory enforceability, as opposed to resolutions passed under Chapter VII.

You could have just given me the Wikipedia link. It's more readable format there. If you read it yourself you will find it just says the same thing that I had been saying.