Over 59,000 Kashmiri Pandits living outside Kashmir: Govt

[Agnostic_Indian]

Yes it does.

The Instrument of Accession was a legal
document created in 1947 to enable each of the
rulers of the princely states under British
suzerainty to join one of the new dominions of
India or Pakistan created by the Partition of
British India .

 

[Fuego]

India is a Hindu state. Period.

I will allow you Indians to do as you please now.

Good bye.

Kindly prove what you are saying. Show me the official declaration from GoI which says that India is a Hindu country.

Or else you are just not making sense.

 

[INDIC]

India is a Hindu state. Period.

I will allow you Indians to do as you please now.

Good bye.

Our constitution says,
"India is a Sovereign, Democratic, Socialist and Secular Republic."

 

[third eye]

Kindly prove what you are saying. Show me the official declaration from GoI which says that India is a Hindu country.

Or else you are just not making sense.

Arre..

He is trolling .

 

[Sashan]

But the fact remains that Kashmir is a Muslim-majority state that should have went to Pakistan.

Partition was based on a simple premise..

Muslim majority states shall become Pakistan and Hindu majority states shall become India.

Even though Pakistan has since split into two, apart from Kashmir, all other Muslim majority states are ruled by Muslims.

Why should Kashmir be any different?

So you mean to say that minority massacre and exodus is allowed in that state? I am talking about Kashmir Pandit issue and you are talking about Kashmir issue. These are two separate issues though I will differ with you on the Kashmir issue as well but let us not derail the topic.

Absolutely

If people want to help Kashmiris, why not the hundreds of Hindus displaced due to ethnic riots?

All these "secular" and human rights brigades who shout with a shrill voice for violation of the various Kashmiri rights, conveniently left out Kashmir Hindus and Sikh Pogrom from their list. That is what I am alluding to.

 

[INDIC]

Once I met a Kashmiri pundit in a bus, she told how her family left the valley in midnight after the threats from the militants. Her father and uncle had decent business and mansion in the valley but they left everything behind.

 

[danger007]

But the fact remains that Kashmir is a Muslim-majority state that should have went to Pakistan.

Partition was based on a simple premise..

Muslim majority states shall become Pakistan and Hindu majority states shall become India.

Even though Pakistan has since split into two, apart from Kashmir, all other Muslim majority states are ruled by Muslims.

Why should Kashmir be any different?

when BD going to part of pakistan then????? according to your logic.... muslim majority should become pakistan right.....

But the fact remains that Kashmir is a Muslim-majority state that should have went to Pakistan.

Partition was based on a simple premise..

Muslim majority states shall become Pakistan and Hindu majority states shall become India.

Even though Pakistan has since split into two, apart from Kashmir, all other Muslim majority states are ruled by Muslims.

Why should Kashmir be any different?

I will say again 1971 might be victory for Indian army but it is a definitely defeat for us...... look at your guys mentality...

 

[Bang Galore]

Kashmir was a princely state so majority minority rule does not apply .

Yes it does.

No, it doesn't. Helps if you actually read instead of rushing to type before you learn how to read.

 

[UKBengali]

when BD going to part of pakistan then????? according to your logic.... muslim majority should become pakistan right.....



I will say again 1971 might be victory for Indian army but it is a definitely defeat for us...... look at your guys mentality...

The fundamental point is that Muslims should rule Muslims and Hindus should rule Hindus.

Kashmir is an anomaly in the sub-continent.

How about Gujarat becoming part of Pakistan then or West Bengal becoming part of Bangladesh?

Strange thing is that India would have been a much more prosperous state if it left Kashmir alone, along with Pakistan and BD now.

No, it doesn't. Helps if you actually read instead of rushing to type before you learn how to read.

Thanks for your pearls of wisdom, oh wise one.



Anyway I must stick to my original intention of not posting in this thread and let the Indians do as they please.

 

[INDIC]

The fundamental point is that Muslims should rule Muslims and Hindus should rule Hindus.

Kashmir is an anomaly in the sub-continent.

Was that fundamentals followed when 1/3 Muslims stayed back in India.

For Bangladeshi like you why are Bangladeshis coming to India by illegal immigration if you deeply follow same fundamentals.

 

[danger007]

guys he is an intentional troll... who always tries to increase posts.... leave him ..... he don't even understand what he is talking about...... lolz if we push hard you will have no room except bay of bengal...... mind your language son...

 

[Bang Galore]

Thanks for your pearls of wisdom, oh wise one.

You are welcome

The fundamental point is that Muslims should rule Muslims and Hindus should rule Hindus.

Kashmir is an anomaly in the sub-continent.

How about Gujarat becoming part of Pakistan then or West Bengal becoming part of Bangladesh?

Fundamental point of what? The 2NT? India obviously didn't care to follow it since it remains a constitutionally secular state.

In any case the Muslim majority, Hindu majority argument did not extend to princely states, only to the directly British controlled parts. The fact that Jinnah did everything in his power including the offer of the free use of the Karachi port to get the Maharaja of Jodhpur, a massively Hindu majority state to throw in his lot with Pakistan. Just because he didn't get his way does not wipe away the attempt. Pakistan has no leg to stand on & India has no need to answer to this particular argument.

 

[rockstarIN]

He is just a troll, do not answer him

 

[ajtr]

The fundamental point is that Muslims should rule Muslims and Hindus should rule Hindus.

You were ruled by muslim pakistan till 1971 what happened to your love for west pakistan then that you chose to go free.I wonder What happened now that you are living in a kafir country UK instead of enjoying muslim rule say in gulf.

Why is it that kashmir should go to pakistan but not bangladesh it was the east pakistan which was in majority so true legacy of pakistan has to go to bangladesh...

 

[foxbat]

You were ruled by muslim pakistan till 1971 what happened to your love for west pakistan then that you chose to go free.I wonder What happened now that you are living in a kafir country UK instead of enjoying muslim rule say in gulf.

Why is it that kashmir should go to pakistan but not bangladesh it was the east pakistan which was in majority so true legacy of pakistan has to go to bangladesh...

Haathi ke daant, Khaane ke aur, dikhane ke aur..

You are welcome




Fundamental point of what? The 2NT? India obviously didn't care to follow it since it remains a constitutionally secular state.

In any case the Muslim majority, Hindu majority argument did not extend to princely states, only to the directly British controlled parts. The fact that Jinnah did everything in his power including the offer of the free use of the Karachi port to get the Maharaja of Jodhpur, a massively Hindu majority state to throw in his lot with Pakistan. Just because he didn't get his way does not wipe away the attempt. Pakistan has no leg to stand on & India has no need to answer to this particular argument.

This argument now only resides on such forums, where kids with no real feel for history use the keyboard to release the excess adrenaline in their systems.. Ignore...