What's new

America's ridiculous stance on Kashmir

coming to topic......america very well knows the situation on ground in kashmir is not favourable to apkistan even more than india and hence will not intrude on a false case being propagated by the pakistanis world wide.....


the people of ajk can be fooled by the them....but not the people of the world......
 
friend....... that is why a district wise breakup is given....so that the statistics are not skewed........im not sure how you can al teh poll taken by a very reputed organisation with vast experience in the field with reputed staticians to be flawed by your own twisted reasoning.......

Again, a fluctuation from 74% to 95% is too much, & such a variance is not reasonable for reliable results. Secondly, you never answered why Jammu & Ladakh have been included in the first place, considering they don't have the separatist tendencies, similar to Gilgit-Baltistan. The results of Jammu & Ladakh should not have been included in the first place, just as Gilgit-Baltistan wasn't, & the results of these two bring the average down for India.

we are a more open state and hence more reports are coming out....simple.......

If you are a more open state, why did you charge Arundhati Roy & Shah Gilani with sedition charges over Kashmir?

need not mwean what you said...it can also mean...people from jk have greater mistrust for pakistans abilities and intents in peace talks......

The Kashmiris in Pakistan have less hope that talks with succeed, whereas the Kashmiris in India have greater hope. Interpret it however you want to.
 
Or, may be people in Pakistan held Kashmir are more radicalized and have less to lose and hence have lesser desire for peace than people living in Jammu and Kashmir..

See buddy, it swings both ways ;)

But then how would you explain this?

Concern over human rights abuses stands at 43 percent on the Indian side and 19 percent on the Pakistani side.
 
Dr. Fai is a citizen of the United States.

Dr. Fai, as an unregistered agent, illegally makes financial contributions to several politicians.

The complaint alleges that the defendants (Fai+Ahmad Zaheer) have conspired to: 1) act as an agent of a foreign principal without registering with the Attorney General in violation of the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA); and 2) falsify, conceal, and cover up material facts they had a duty to disclose in matters within the jurisdiction of Executive Branch agencies of the U.S. government.

“FARA is designed to ensure that the U.S. government and American public know the underlying source of information and identity of persons attempting to influence U.S. policy and laws. The defendants are accused of thwarting this process by concealing the fact that a foreign government was funding and directing their lobbying and public relations efforts in America,” said Assistant Attorney General Monaco.

The affidavit alleges that, although the KAC held itself out to be a Kashmiri organization run by Kashmiris and financed by Americans, the KAC is one of three “Kashmir Centers” that are actually run by elements of the Pakistani government, including Pakistan’s military intelligence service, the Inter-Services Intelligence Agency (ISI). The two other Kashmir Centers are in London, England and Brussels, Belgium.

When questioned by the FBI about these relationships in March 2007, Fai allegedly stated that he had never met anyone who identified himself as being affiliated with the ISI. In March 2010, the Justice Department sent Fai a letter notifying him of his possible obligation to register as a foreign agent with the Justice Department. In his written response to the Justice Department, Fai asserted that neither he nor KAC had ever engaged in any activities for or provided any services to Pakistan or any foreign entity. In a March 2011 interview with the FBI, Fai again denied having any relationship with anyone in the Pakistani government.

The affidavit alleges that Fai repeatedly submitted annual KAC strategy reports and budgetary requirements to his Pakistani government handlers for approval. One document entitled “Plan of Action of KAC/Kashmir Center for Fiscal Year 2009” laid out Fai’s intended strategy to secure U.S. Congressional support in order to encourage the Executive Branch to support self-determination in Kashmir; his strategy to build new alliances in the State Department, the National Security Council, the Congress and the Pentagon, and to expand KAC’s media efforts.

According to the affidavit, Fai and the KAC have received at least $4 million, from the Pakistani government since the mid-1990s through Ahmad and his funding network. The money is allegedly routed to Fai through Ahmad and a network of other individuals connected to Ahmad. Ahmad allegedly arranges for his contacts in the United States to provide money to Fai in return for repayment of those amounts in Pakistan. (Hawala at work)

To date, neither Fai nor Ahmad nor the KAC has registered as an official agent of the Pakistani or Kashmiri governments with the Attorney General as required by FARA.

The public is reminded that an indictment and criminal complaint contain mere allegations and that defendants are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Dr. Fai gets arrested for this illegal activity.

So if Fai has no relation with any official in Pakistani government, then at what point did the matter turn into a Pakistan vs. USA issue, that Pakistan is raising protests against his arrest?
 
Again, a fluctuation from 74% to 95% is too much, & such a variance is not reasonable for reliable results.

friend i have no reason to suspect them and believe you unless you have decades worth of experience in these things like chatham house has.....i hope you understand.....also you are biased in your viewpoint as a pakistani...

Secondly, you never answered why Jammu & Ladakh have been included in the first place, considering they don't have the separatist tendencies, similar to Gilgit-Baltistan. The results of Jammu & Ladakh should not have been included in the first place, & the results of these two bring the average down for India.

really stupid question my friend......because jammu and ladakh was also a part of the princely state of kashmir and so they are included....period.....just because pakistan annexed northern areas does not mean they were not a part of the princely state of kashmir.....and so the poll was conducted in all the areas of erstwhile princely state of kashmir.....which pakistan claims disputed......

If you are a more open state, why did you charge Arundhati Roy & Shah Gilani with sedition charges over Kashmir?

because open state does not mean a state that condones separatist movements and secessionist speeches......our constitution is like that....in an un-open state they would have been picked up in the night and would not have been seen thereafter.....

The Kashmiris in Pakistan have less hope that talks with succeed, whereas the Kashmiris in India have greater hope. Interpret it however you want to.

our people are more optimist and peace loving than radicalised panjabis in ajk.....

But then how would you explain this?

i have already answered it friend........no need to ask each and every one........
 
Again, a fluctuation from 74% to 95% is too much, & such a variance is not reasonable for reliable results.

friend i have no reason to suspect them and believe you unless you have decades worth of experience in these things like chatham house has.....i hope you understand.....also you are biased in your viewpoint as a pakistani...

No one is talking about suspecting anything, however, such variability in poll figures does not translate into reliable results, which results in a faulty study. It's pretty straightforward.

Secondly, you never answered why Jammu & Ladakh have been included in the first place, considering they don't have the separatist tendencies, similar to Gilgit-Baltistan. The results of Jammu & Ladakh should not have been included in the first place, & the results of these two bring the average down for India.

stupid question my friend......because jammu and ladakh was also a part of the princely state of kashmir and so they are included....period.....just because pakistan annexed northern areas does not mean they were not a part of the princely state of kashmir.....

Pakistan didn't annex Gilgit-Baltistan, the people willingly integrated into Pakistan. Jammu & Ladakh should not have been included if Gilgit-Baltistan wasn't. So that's another reason for this faulty study.

If you are a more open state, why did you charge Arundhati Roy & Shah Gilani with sedition charges over Kashmir?

because open state does not mean a state that condones separatist movements and secessionist speeches......our constitution is like that....in an un-open state they would have been picked up in the night and would not have been seen thereafter.....

Arundhati Roy did not start a separatist movement or give secessionist speeches. I also suggest that you read Article 370 of the Indian constitution on Kashmir.

But then how would you explain this?

i have already answered it friend........no need to ask each and every one........

That still doesn't answer the question why there have allegedly been more human rights abuses in Indian occupied Kashmir (by almost 2.5 times) than in Azad Kashmir.
 
Actually, 66% of Kashmiris in Indian Kashmir want independence from India:

Kashmir 101: Decoding Kashmir's conflict - What do Kashmiris want now? - CSMonitor.com

Most Kashmiris want independence, India imposes curfew | Asia-Pasific | World Bulletin



There is no reliable source that says 44% of people from AJK want independence from Pakistan. And AJK is technically not part of Pakistan.

The people of Gilgit-Baltistan opted to be with Pakistan, although J&K & AJK were trying to force Gilgit-Baltistan to integrate with them, against their wishes of course. The people of Gilgit-Baltistan are ethnically, religiously & culturally different from the people of J&K & AJK; & do not want to be dominated by J&K & AJK, which is why they recently had an election in 2009, which had huge voter participation:

http://www.hrcp-web.org/pdf/Gilgit-Baltistan Report.pdf
So for those 66% people,India will give away an important land,which is legally ours?What about other 34%?
Those who want freedom,they are free to go anywhere else,but the land was given to India and will be with India forever.
 
Another point is,only Kashmiri muslims(not all) want independence from India,what about the Brahmins and Hindus/Pandits? Kashmiri Brahmins and Hindus/Pandits are normal Indian citizens,not volatile like Kashmiri muslims,you don't hear protests coming in from Leh,Ladakh,Drass,Kargil,etc Because Muslims are either less or Zero there.Its mainly Srinagar and surrounding areas(with muslim majority) that erupt.
So demand of freedom by only one religious group of the region(that too not 100% muslims) is illogical.
 
But then how would you explain this?

I would counter it by the following paragraph from the EU Parliament REPORT on Kashmir: present situation and future prospects


The report Urges the EU to take a firm stance against the abomination of the Hudood Ordinances
and to revisit, critically, the 3rd Generation Cooperation Agreement it signed with
Pakistan in 2004, Article 1 of which states very clearly that the Agreement must be based
on a true respect for human rights and the upholding of true democratic principles, given
that it is pre-eminently clear that Pakistan is not living up to its commitments, especially
in AJK;
20. Urges Pakistan to revisit its concept of democratic accountability, minority and women's
rights in AJK, which as elsewhere are key to improving conditions for the people and
tackling the menace of terrorism;
 
No one is talking about suspecting anything, however, such variability in poll figures does not translate into reliable results, which results in a faulty study. It's pretty straightforward.

again those people at chatham house know what they are doing....so there is no reason to doubt the veracity.........

Pakistan didn't annex Gilgit-Baltistan, the people willingly integrated into Pakistan. Jammu & Ladakh should not have been included if Gilgit-Baltistan wasn't. So that's another reason for this faulty study.

maybe pak did not give permission for the polls to be conducted in northern areas as it may bust some myths...who knows.....also even if the people want the areas just cant be integrated unless the whole of dispute is fnished....jammu and ladakh wants to integrate into india....but we have not done what pak has done to na....that means we are sincere in our commitment to kashmiris whjile pak isnt.....straight forward.....

Arundhati Roy did not start a separatist movement or give secessionist speeches. I also suggest that you read Article 370 of the Indian constitution on Kashmir.

supporting a secessionist movement is sedition by any definition of the word......


That still doesn't answer the question why there have allegedly been more human rights abuses in Indian occupied Kashmir (by almost 2.5 times) than in Azad Kashmir.

who knows there might have been more abuses in p-ok...but they have been covered up by the establishment.....also read karan's post which quotes the eu parliament report on hr abuses in p-ok......
 
also everyone please debate on america's stand on kashmir...not on the kashmir dispute itself....indians and pakistanis cannot agree on that and tehre is no use debating......
 
Pakistan was just unfortunate,not to stash out billions of $$s for uncle sam's custom built Arms and was neither interested to have a confrontation with China, India came out as a viable option, they had to lick indian balls the way the licked Pakistan's when faced with the Soviet Confrontation, Indias best success would be that to have a workable Solution with China and shouldn't make the mistake the Pakistan did to go out of the way to support US policy of stinging the Soviets in Afghanistan. As long as the Chinese pose some degree of threat to the West, India's sun will continue to shine but the moment the chinese threat perception lowers , look how rusty those C-17 Globe Masters which India ordered will get..The Bestest policy for india is to get the juice from everybody,even Pakistan too, Rather than going on the road to confrontation and reagional instabillity , Prety Sure all that uncle sam's lobbying and mouth watering deals wouldnt force Hard Core Pro Indian strategists to deviate from the true Economic Pricipals laid down by MK Gandhi and hopefully they would rightfully fit the long term threat perception posed by the US to fan reaginal instability in there calculus.!
 
Pakistan was just unfortunate,not to stash out billions of $$s for uncle sam's custom built Arms and was neither interested to have a confrontation with China, India came out as a viable option, they had to lick indian balls the way the licked Pakistan's when faced with the Soviet Confrontation, Indias best success would be that to have a workable Solution with China and shouldn't make the mistake the Pakistan did to go out of the way to support US policy of stinging the Soviets in Afghanistan. As long as the Chinese pose some degree of threat to the West, India's sun will continue to shine but the moment the chinese threat perception lowers , look how rusty those C-17 Globe Masters which India ordered will get..The Bestest policy for india is to get the juice from everybody,even Pakistan too, Rather than going on the road to confrontation and reagional instabillity , Prety Sure all that uncle sam's lobbying and mouth watering deals wouldnt force Hard Core Pro Indian strategists to deviate from the true Economic Pricipals laid down by MK Gandhi and hopefully they would rightfully fit the long term threat perception posed by the US to fan reaginal instability in there calculus.!

thats y india calls usa for friendship not an ally who gets bullied again n again.
ynks know that there is huge mistrust b/w us and they know they have to deal 50-50.
 
Pakistan was just unfortunate,not to stash out billions of $$s for uncle sam's custom built Arms and was neither interested to have a confrontation with China, India came out as a viable option, they had to lick indian balls the way the licked Pakistan's when faced with the Soviet Confrontation, Indias best success would be that to have a workable Solution with China and shouldn't make the mistake the Pakistan did to go out of the way to support US policy of stinging the Soviets in Afghanistan. As long as the Chinese pose some degree of threat to the West, India's sun will continue to shine but the moment the chinese threat perception lowers , look how rusty those C-17 Globe Masters which India ordered will get..The Bestest policy for india is to get the juice from everybody,even Pakistan too, Rather than going on the road to confrontation and reagional instabillity , Prety Sure all that uncle sam's lobbying and mouth watering deals wouldnt force Hard Core Pro Indian strategists to deviate from the true Economic Pricipals laid down by MK Gandhi and hopefully they would rightfully fit the long term threat perception posed by the US to fan reaginal instability in there calculus.!

the days of the nam are long gone.....now is the time to milk the usa and the west cows using the china threat card.....we are usa's partners and not allies....there is a difference......
 
Pakistan was just unfortunate,not to stash out billions of $$s for uncle sam's custom built Arms and was neither interested to have a confrontation with China, India came out as a viable option, they had to lick indian balls the way the licked Pakistan's when faced with the Soviet Confrontation, Indias best success would be that to have a workable Solution with China and shouldn't make the mistake the Pakistan did to go out of the way to support US policy of stinging the Soviets in Afghanistan. As long as the Chinese pose some degree of threat to the West, India's sun will continue to shine but the moment the chinese threat perception lowers , look how rusty those C-17 Globe Masters which India ordered will get..The Bestest policy for india is to get the juice from everybody,even Pakistan too, Rather than going on the road to confrontation and reagional instabillity , Prety Sure all that uncle sam's lobbying and mouth watering deals wouldnt force Hard Core Pro Indian strategists to deviate from the true Economic Pricipals laid down by MK Gandhi and hopefully they would rightfully fit the long term threat perception posed by the US to fan reaginal instability in there calculus.!

the days of the nam are long gone.....now is the time to milk the usa and the west cows using the china threat card.....we are usa's partners and not allies....there is a difference......

well i hope that milk does not let india to become a hostile country for its neighbors(Pakistan China Bangladesh)
 
Back
Top Bottom