India trying to occupy Bangladesh territory

[Jako]

But your pakistani friends here say india freed bd!!!.......buddy take a nap,after that,see in mumbai how many people were kept as hostages,in kashmir see how many terrorist insurgents are killed every year.......and your self report bout the 2001 stand off is far biased than what actually happenned!!!.....i dont mean to deaminize bd here by any means,i know it was afterall bd freedom fighters who brought you freedom,but give the credit where it duely belongs!.......who destroyed the pak frontline sub?....who equipped and trained the freedom fighters?.....

 

[idune]

Ignorance is bliss, they say. It nicely insulates one from the inconvenience of having to face the reality. Let me give you a good news, which doesn’t seem to have reached Tokyo in 17 years. Tin Bigha has been leased out to Bangladesh and since 26th June, 1992, the corridor has been operating, from 6 A.M to 6 P.M. Now about the history in brief.

Another sack of pathetic indian deception to disown treaty responsibility and abusing it. Tin bigha corridor was suppose to handed over to Bangladesh according to treaty not kept it open for few hours and opresse Bangladeshis living around it.

Even today, there are countless incidenets of indian and BSF atrocities on Bangladeshis in tin bigha corridor. yet another indian trying to write bollywood story line inspired by toxic bullcr*p - india implemented treay.

But implementation, on India’s part, got delayed due to massive agitation by the people of Kuchlibari, Dhaprhat and Mekhliganj, spearheaded by Kuchlibari Sangram Committee and Tin Bigha Sangram Committee, on one hand, and a writ petition in Calcutta High Court on another.

!974 treaty is not only about enclaves but also overall india Bangladesh border. Why should Bangladesh has to listen to any indian excuse in name of internal agitation? Its state to state treay and its indian govt duty to implement it. Besides, india is not stopping Tipaimukh dam just beacuse people from Monipur and surrounding areas are protesting and agitated.

You want to go on? your indian branded deception and pathologic lie will be unmasked one after another.

That’s another BS. Padua has always been in India’s possession since 1947,

So just because india forcefully occupied Padua in 1947 india should continue it? What a bankrupt logic. In same india should forget its claim over land in Auranachal and may be China should get hold of more territory and hold it long enough to legitize the claim.

 

[toxic_pus]

The bottom image should clear your confusion

...and the point is? The image only confirms what I have said, that Padma is not a distributary. (At least, the part of my post which you have quoted to go with your picture, relates to that only.)

That is why we always ask the governemt to double check in any indian led treaty. There must be always a Zilapir Patch

You are now being delirious. You can't find a fault with the agreement, can't accuse India of stealing water at Farakka - so there must be a catch. Evil India just can't be trusted.

By any chance, is ostrich your favourite birdie.

How the hell AL agreed to the water sharing at Farakka point whereas India withdrew the water long before.

Maybe because the barrage is at Farakka....

Above all we accepted Farakka whatever it is. But our wishfull thinking should be that India as a neighbour will not do it again in other river.

India will do whatever is necessary to protect its interest, and that includes its own citizens. However, nothing should be done against international norms and treaties.

 

[idune]

You had put 400 + 400 IA troops for the offence, and the BDR defenders at the border outpost numbered only 13. BDR troops did not blink at the news of 400 IA troops, but gave a short prayer to Allah Almighty, embraced each other, sought forgiveness for any wrongdoings, and then fought violently and killed 97 of your troops. Do not believe in the official figure of 16 IA dead, it was 97 including the Commanding Officer. 3 BDR troops died, but history was made.

That's why first cowardly act of india as soon as awami stooges were installed was - Peelkhana massacre. indian hand is further soaked with our blood. Bangladeshis of this and future generation will not forget massacre by indians.

 

[toxic_pus]

Another sack of pathetic indian deception to disown treaty responsibility and abusing it. Tin bigha corridor was suppose to handed over to Bangladesh according to treaty not kept it open for few hours and opresse Bangladeshis living around it.

This is a typical cocktail of BD whine and goal post shifting. The claim that was made, by one BD member, was that Tin Bigha hasn't been opened. I called his bluff.. Why didn't you choose to correct him and let his lies float around like sh!t?

Tin Bigha is not kept open 24x7, because of security reasons. Solve that problem on your side and then stake your claim.

Even today, there are countless incidenets of indian and BSF atrocities on Bangladeshis in tin bigha corridor. yet another indian trying to write bollywood story line inspired by toxic bullcr*p - india implemented treay.

Keep clutching at straws..

!974 treaty is not only about enclaves but also overall india Bangladesh border. Why should Bangladesh has to listen to any indian excuse in name of internal agitation? Its state to state treay and its indian govt duty to implement it.

Another attempt to shift the goal post. But then again, I don't expect you and Pakistanis to understand the compulsions of democracy, or that of judiciary.

Besides, india is not stopping Tipaimukh dam just beacuse people from Monipur and surrounding areas are protesting and agitated.

As far as I know, there hasn't been any litigation yet (I may be wrong here). You probably have never heard of Narmada Sarovar Dam project, and how it got delayed due to massive agitation and litigation. Even after Supreme Courts decision, in favour of the project, the agitations continue.

Btw, Tin Bigha was not stopped, it was delayed, just like Narmada Sarovar Dam project.

You want to go on? your indian branded deception and pathologic lie will be unmasked one after another.

You have only unmasked your hate filled bug sized brain, nothing more.

So just because india forcefully occupied Padua in 1947 india should continue it? What a bankrupt logic. In same india should forget its claim over land in Auranachal and may be China should get hold of more territory and hold it long enough to legitize the claim.

Another lame attempt to shift goalpost. First off, the original claim made by that member was that, India had moved its border to Padua in 1971. I, again called his bluff. Second off, India didn't forcefully occupy Padua, but it fell on its side during the land division. Same way as Boraibari fell on Pakistan's sides.

I can see that you have quietly side stepped Boraibari. Good job. You are making your fellow hate mongers proud.

As with the Arunachal Pradesh, keep dreaming wet.

 

[idune]

The claim that was made, by one BD member, was that Tin Bigha hasn't been opened. I called his bluff.. Why didn't you choose to correct him and let his lies float around like sh!t?

Tin Bigha is not kept open 24x7, because of security reasons. Solve that problem on your side and then stake your claim.

According to treaty Bangladesh should be in control of tin bigha period, not india. 6- 12 hours is just blatant abuse and violation.

Now that your pathalogic lie exposed, your excuse was you calling the bluff. What a classic indian con act.

 

[idune]

1996 Treaty on Sharing of the Ganges Waters at Farakka
Article II, Clause II & III

(ii) The indicative schedule at Annexure II, as referred to in sub para (i) above, is based on 40 years (1949-1988) 10-day period average availability of water at Farakka. Every effort would be made by the upper riparian to protect flows of water at Farakka as in the 40-years average availability as mentioned above.

(iii) In the event flow at Farakka falls below 50,000 cusecs in any 10-day period, the two governments will enter into immediate consultations to make adjustments on an emergency basis, in accordance with the principles of equity, fair play and no harm to either party.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to Article II of the treaty, India should maintain availability of water at Farakka point at 40 years average level. While Bangladeshi Indian stooge govt left this crucial clause to mercy of their master in india, Indian govt abused and abusing that with usual con act and force to decrease water at Farakka point every year by dam and other means of withdrawal. Once water level reaches below 50000 cusec, India no longer abide by the treaty to provide any water to Bangladesh. Any and all flow of in Ganges will be kept in India which is more than what allowed under current treaty.

So this toxic lie has been spewed by Indians so far on water sharing estimates are just sheer deception and con act to bollywood proportion.

I am not amused, I dont think anyone else either. only people left are indians, specially ones from west bengal greatly disappointed seeing another indian con act going bust.

 

[toxic_pus]

According to treaty Bangladesh should be in control of tin bigha period, not india. 6- 12 hours is just blatant abuse and violation.

Not really. According to the treaty (Para 2, of 1982 Agreement), India is to retain sovereignty over Tin Bigha, and Bangladesh is to have possession and use (Para 3, of 1982 Agreement) of that piece of land.

By virtue of lease, Bangladesh has the possession of Tin Bigha which it uses as transit between the main land and enclave, thus Para 3 is fulfilled. By virtue of retaining sovereignty, India retains ‘control’, thus Para 2 is fulfilled.

In case you are wondering, ‘control’ is an intrinsic property of ‘sovereignty’.

Now that your pathalogic lie exposed, your excuse was you calling the bluff. What a classic indian con act.

Guess whose ‘pathological lie’ has been exposed. Btw, that chest thumping of yours is reminding me of an animal that roams naked in the wild.

 

[toxic_pus]

According to Article II of the treaty, India should maintain availability of water at Farakka point at 40 years average level.

The relevant part, for you:

The indicative schedule at Annexure II, as referred to in sub para (i) above, is based on 40 years (1949-1988) 10-day period average availability of water at Farakka. Every effort would be made by the upper riparian to protect flows of water at Farakka as in the 40-years average availability as mentioned above.

While you have tried, desperately, to give the impression of a ‘must’, the words simply imply ‘try’, meaning, that the 40 year average is not something written in stone and India is not ‘compelled’ to maintain that average, particularly if it is unable to do so.

I have already mentioned how the 40 years average was erroneous and skewed in favour of Bangladesh.

Once water level reaches below 50000 cusec, India no longer abide by the treaty to provide any water to Bangladesh. Any and all flow of in Ganges will be kept in India which is more than what allowed under current treaty.

Load of BS. Once more, for your eyes only:

In the event flow at Farakka falls below 50,000 cusecs in any 10-day period, the two governments will enter into immediate consultations to make adjustments on an emergency basis, in accordance with the principles of equity, fair play and no harm to either party.

Which part of that clause says that India can keep ‘all flow of in Ganges’. Making your own paranoid interpretations, huh?

It is really amazing how you are quoting original documents and then blatantly lying about the interpretation and then patting your own back. Have you skipped your medication this morning?

 

[idune]

Not really. According to the treaty (Para 2, of 1982 Agreement), India is to retain sovereignty over Tin Bigha, and Bangladesh is to have possession and use (Para 3, of 1982 Agreement) of that piece of land.

By virtue of lease, Bangladesh has the possession of Tin Bigha which it uses as transit between the main land and enclave, thus Para 3 is fulfilled. By virtue of retaining sovereignty, India retains ‘control’, thus Para 2 is fulfilled.

Yes I have read the article of the treaty. And by your own admission Bangladesh should be in possession of Tin Bigha for unhindered communication of its citizens. India had not relinquished that possession and refused to do so. But india used the same treaty making completly different meaning out of "possession" or "lease" to take possession (control) (lease) of Bangladeshi corridor for its enclave. Pathetic and or pathological indian lie and deception. Readers can take their peak.

Yet you as an indian stacking up more pathological lie and just hoping someone would buy into your circular deception.

 

[toxic_pus]

Yes I have read the article of the treaty. And by your own admission Bangladesh should be in possession of Tin Bigha for unhindered communication of its citizens. India had not relinquished that possession and refused to do so. But india used the same treaty making completly different meaning out of "possession" or "lease" to take possession (control) (lease) of Bangladeshi corridor for its enclave. Pathetic and or pathological indian lie and deception. Readers can take their peak.

I was expecting this. 'Legal' possession is not same as 'physical' possession. If there is no 'legal' possession, which the lease confers, then no Bangladeshi would have been able to use that piece of land. The agreement doesn't talk of any 'physical' possession.

There is another damning reason for not handing over the 'physical' possession to BD. The 'sovereignty' clause. If that piece of land is handed over to BD, then 'sovereignty', as per Para 2, is relinquished.

Ok pumpkin?

Yet you as an indian stacking up more pathological lie and just hoping someone would buy into your circular deception.

blah blah blah, and some more blah blah

 

[toxic_pus]

If India is so much in love for freedom and independence, then it should give freedom to the Kashmiris. Instead, you have mobilized more than 700,000 of your troops to control their freedom.

Did you run out of zeros or what. Here, let me help you. Number of soldiers in Kashmir is: 70000000000000000000000000000000000.

Happy now?

By the way, was not it due to the direct assistance by our freedom fighters in 1971 that gave you the ONLY war victory in the recent past? So, India should come to us, bow to us and express thanks for that deed every year on Dec. 16. It should not be the other way.

You mean the Bangladesh that is on planet Delusion. Here, on planet Earth, things happened a bit differently though.

 

[idune]

The relevant part, for you:

While you have tried, desperately, to give the impression of a ‘must’, the words simply imply ‘try’, meaning, that the 40 year average is not something written in stone and India is not ‘compelled’ to maintain that average, particularly if it is unable to do so.

I have already mentioned how the 40 years average was erroneous and skewed in favour of Bangladesh.

According to Article II of the treaty, India should maintain availability of water at Farakka point at 40 years average level. While Bangladeshi Indian stooge govt left this crucial clause to mercy of their master in india, Indian govt abused and abusing that with usual con act and force to decrease water at Farakka point every year by dam and other means of withdrawal.

Even though Awami stooge govt left it to india for maintaining 40 average flow at Farakka point on good faith basis, Indian are abusing that good faith and withdrewing water before Farkka point. Who would trust india after such blatant breach of trust????

So all indian actions of withdrawing water before reaching Farakka, point to obvious - at some point of time india will make the treaty obsolete.

Which part of that clause says that India can keep ‘all flow of in Ganges’. Making your own paranoid interpretations, huh?

It is really amazing how you are quoting original documents and then blatantly lying about the interpretation and then patting your own back. Have you skipped your medication this morning?

Once water level reaches below 50000 cusec, India no longer abide by the treaty to provide any water to Bangladesh. Any and all flow of water (except rainly season offcourse) in Ganges will be kept in India which is more than what allowed under current treaty.

Here is example of indian action to prove my point and further expose indian pathological lie and deception.

Bangladesh sends fourth letter for meeting India still not ready for talks on water sharing

India is not responding to Bangladesh's proposal to discuss the water sharing of seven rivers, including Teesta as Bangladesh recently sent the fourth letter requesting a meeting in Dhaka.

http://www.bangladeshobserveronline....ront.htm#head3

 

[Righteous_Fire]

^ My Indian brother You would also think, why do you have to put so many troops there? whether it is 70 or 70000000000........

and while you are at it, can you also explain why no more than 5% of the populace turns out for your so called elections?

 

[toxic_pus]

So all indian actions of withdrawing water before reaching Farakka, point to obvious - at some point of time india will make the treaty obsolete....

Once water level reaches below 50000 cusec, India no longer abide by the treaty to provide any water to Bangladesh. Any and all flow of water (except rainly season offcourse) in Ganges will be kept in India which is more than what allowed under current treaty.

Speculation at best, paranoia at worst. If India really attempts to reduce the water level to less than 50,000 cusec, at Farakka, then:

1. India doesn't get to retain all the water. A new agreement has to be drafted 'on an emergency basis'.

2. India would still not be able to divert more than 40,000 cusec of water in any case, because that is the maximum capacity of Farakka. This doesn't serve any additional purpose because, as it is, India gets a minimum of 35,000 cusec and a maximum 40,000 cusec of water. In fact, if it falls below 50,000 a new agreement will almost invariably go against India's interest because even if it is agreed that both the countries should share 50% of available water, then India's share will never be more than 25,000 cusec which is far lower than the current quota. Clearly India stands to loose.

3. It will be a death knell for Hoogly river, which in turn will kill Haldia port.


Read, think and then hit the reply button. Is it too much to ask?

Here is example of indian action to prove my point and further expose indian pathological lie and deception.

Unrelated, irrelevant.