What's new

Kashmir | News & Discussions.

So, is new media only reinforcing old stereotypes?


  • Total voters
    44
Which means, from my point of view, that you consider terrorism against India OK whether or not such deeds can be traced back to Pakistan. That's what the world community wants Pakistan to give up, and what the GoP (and Pakistanis in general, it seems) still won't commit to do.

People fighting an occupying force are called FREEDOM FIGHTERS.According to UN.And many countries have attained freedom through it.So calling it terrorism is nothin but retarded.And i hope you know 90000 youths have been killed in kashmir.Scores are missing and same goes for rape victims.And the FREEDOM FIGHTING started in 1980s DECADES after the promise of Freedom by Nehru or REFRENDUM TO CHOSE COUNTRY OF CHOICE was not filled.But it was ended by prominent KASHMIRI FREEDOM FIGHTERS like Yasin Malik to show the world and the so-called largest democracy that they are not savage barbarians or terrorists and are fighting a fair war.And even after they did come on the discussion table to talk and show the peaceful protest for freedom remains unanswered.
Even aftr 62 years of occupation india has FAILED to pot them into the main national stream.They have not lost there identity even after 62 years they still call themself KASHMIRIS not indians.
During independence it was proposed that PEOPLE NOT THE PRINCE or maharaja will deciede there FAIT.Was that agriment fulfilled>>>>>>>>>.?
Hyderabad was a princely Majority muslim state it wanted to join Pakistan was it allowed to do so?IT WAS CAPTURED BY FORCE USING MILITARY?
SAME GOES FOR STATE OF JUNAGARH WHOSE HEAD STILL RECIEVES PAY FROM ISLAMABAD>?
And even according to indian constitution Kashmir is not a part of india it is a DISPUTED PRINCELY STATE.
So to call them terrorist is a big lie and serious accusation comming from a jew as yourself,And please put this topic on ur Blog where you discuss ANTI SEMITES.
 
Why doesn't the international community pressure India to agree to fulfill its commitment to the existing resolutions and negotiate with Pakistan to implement a referendum?

.

This solution is well past its "Best before" date. Today the referendum is just a negotiation chip used by Pakistan to score a point in negotiations with India. The concept is as foolhardy as trying to get Pakistan to give up its nukes
 
Khuda se mannath hai meri…lauta de jannat woh meri…
woh aman… woh chaman… ka nazaara…
Oh kudha yaa… lauta de… kashmir dobara
 
Last edited by a moderator:
People fighting an occupying force are called FREEDOM FIGHTERS.According to UN.
Oh! so UN is now calling LeT JuD etc as freedom fighters.. Hmm.. didnt they ban those organizations

Even aftr 62 years of occupation india has FAILED to pot them into the main national stream.They have not lost there identity even after 62 years they still call themself KASHMIRIS not indians.
You mean like Baluchi people call them selves that instead of calling themselves as Pakistanis?? What kind of a sick logic is that??

And even according to indian constitution Kashmir is not a part of india it is a DISPUTED PRINCELY STATE.

This is rubbish even by your standards..State of J&K is governed under the provisions of article 370 of constitution of India:

This article specifies that except for Defence, Foreign Affairs, Finance and Communications,(matters specified in the instrument of accession) the Indian Parliament needs the State Government's concurrence for applying all other laws. Thus the state's residents lived under a separate set of laws, including those related to citizenship, ownership of property, and fundamental rights, as compared to other Indians.


So to call them terrorist is a big lie and serious accusation comming from a jew as yourself,And please put this topic on ur Blog where you discuss ANTI SEMITES.

Racist Alert....
 
Nowhere close to refusing to honor the resolutions period, which is India's current position, and has been for several decades.

[...]

Pakistan has not willfully refused to implement the resolutions, so no, Pakistan is not on that list.
First, refusing to withdraw your citizens and tribesmen, then constitutionally incorporating Northern Areas leaving it in a limbo, then ceding territory to China, then blatantly violating the cease fire agreement in 1965.
Nothing in the resolutions suggests 'defunctness' based on whether an insurgency occurred or not, in fact, the resolutions remain valid until replaced by new resolutions or the resolution of the dispute between the concerned parties.
Those holy UN resolutions became defunct in 1965. Thank Ayub for that.
 
DAWN.COM | National | Presidency has record of Kashmir proposal: Kasuri

ISLAMABAD: Former foreign minister and PML (Likeminded) leader Khurshid Mahmood Kasuri strongly reacted on Monday to a statement made by Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi rejecting claims made by the Musharraf government and his foreign minister about progress on resolving the Kashmir issue as a result of backchannel diplomacy.

Mr Qureshi said on Sunday that if there was any proposal it might have been a secret between some individuals, but neither he nor the people of Pakistan knew anything about it because there was no record at the Foreign Office.

Mohammad Sadiq, a former Foreign Office spokesman and currently Pakistan’s Ambassador to Afghanistan, said in an interview last year that the secret proposal was still on the table.

In a statement issued by the PML House, Mr Khurshid claimed that the record of the proposal was with the government.



In fact, he said, President Asif Ali Zardari had in his first press conference as head of the state referred to progress on Kashmir settlement and stated rather ‘overenthusiastically’ that he was aware of the progress and the nation would soon hear good news.

“At least President Zardari, according to my knowledge, is aware of the backchannel diplomacy and the Presidency has a detailed record of it,” he added.

Mr Kasuri said it was “unfortunate and unbelievable” that there was a total disconnect between the Presidency and the Foreign Office over the issue. “Normally, if the Presidency has any record relating to the foreign policy the Foreign Office should have access to it.”

The former foreign minister said he was surprised by Mr Qureshi’s statement, adding that it was a fair assumption that the Presidency would have shared the details with the foreign minister.

Mr Kasuri said that information about progress in backchannel talks was in the public domain.
 
~~snip~~

Regarding Kashmir, it is best that for now both countries accept LOC as soft border and make it easier for Kashmiris to travel on both sides of LOC within Kashmir.
This step tied with a review of the water accord to address Pakistan's genuine concerns as a downstream entity would make things many times better between both countries.
Third can be a trade accord and fourth can be transit of goods and gas etc.

This will deal a death blow to the extremist element in both countries and will usher in a new era of prosperity with both peoples focused towards economic development.

For sake of peace, egos have to be checked and past grievances should at least be toned down.

The only problem with making LOC the IB WITH SOFT BORDER will be arising from the lack of trust between India- Pakistan. With the kind of history we have, it (the LOC) has the potential to become another Durand line. A border dividing a particular ethnic group, not acceptable to the particular ethnic group living on both side of the border.
 
Perhaps you should apply your energies to convincing the international community to pressure India to let the Kashmiris decide, as promised under the UNSC resolutions.
Yes. That's something Pakistan should be hammering at over and over in the U.N. and bilaterally. Instead we have either Pakistani plots for conquest (according to Ms. Bhutto) and/or this terrorism stuff. All of which serves to make Pakistan look bad and India look good internationally. (Furthermore, Pakistanis choose not to perceive that many Kashmiris don't want such violence.)

Oh wait - you support -
Let's save the off-topic stuff for another thread.
 
I think this is what the Indian government must do.
The centre must divide Jammu and Kashmir into three separate states.
1)Jammu
2)Kashmir
3)Ladakh

Jammu can be a normal state with a chief minister and a governer.
Ladakh can be a union territory and Kashmir can be a autonomous state but under the supervision of New Delhi.In that way the kashmiri people will be happy and they will not respond to the crap being told by some bearded mullahs across the border.
 
Hyderabad was a princely Majority muslim state it wanted to join Pakistan was it allowed to do so?IT WAS CAPTURED BY FORCE USING MILITARY?
1. It was never a muslim majority state.
2. it was not military but was by police action called operation polo when razakars were trying hard to continue the nizam rule and civil war broke out.
may be you should get your facts right...:azn:
 
One thing I wish to know is -

If Pakistan want Kashmir's independence - then why did they invade an independent Kashmir in the first place?

What do Pakistani history books teach? Do they teach that India invaded Kashmir first? Or do they teach that the ruler of Kashmir appealed to the Indian state after Pakistan had invaded and was fairly close to Srinagar?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom