You are on page 1of 272

0.

1
Kashmir
Dispute
Terrorism and Freedom Fight
Line of control; boundaries in red

0.2
More than 60 year after the independence Pakistan and India are still to behave as good
neighbors. Both countries have their stand for not having friendship and cordial relations. It has
always been the Issue of Kashmir. Several times during these past decades leaders of India and
Pakistan have tried to sit together to solve the problems. India insists that Kashmir is part of
India; Pakistan argues that it is a disputed territory. One part is controlled by India by deploying
a very strong contingent of Indian army and the rest is controlled by Pakistan of course not with
the military might. Indians argue that Pakistan should vacate the territory under its control.
Pakistan insists that Kashmir is the core issue and should be solved according to the wishes of
the people of Kashmir.

Several occasions have come when these two countries sat together to discuss issues. Many a
times it seemed as if finally they will resolve the differences. Something drastic happens; every
time, either someone starts shooting in the galleries of Indian parliament, or some mysterious
hand burns several innocent people in a train and as a repercussion hundreds of innocent die in
the riot and the train itself. Same has happened once again in Mumbai; like always India has got
out of the negotiations and insists that there can be no talks unless Mumbai case is solved.

Right from the beginning India has tried to convince the world through its lobbying and through
the international forms that Kashmir is not an issue. Both parts of Kashmir started with a prime
minister designated for each side. Kashmir with Pakistan still has a prime minister, but India
stripped off the title from its Prime Minister Sheikh Abdullah and staged a play to include the
disputed territory in the Indian union. Indians seem convinced that what they have done to
include the territory of Kashmir into the Indian union has been successful. But even after more
than half a century voices reverberate to say:

India should realize that UN resolutions should be the base for the settlement of the dispute.

Miliband says settle Kashmir issue, Delhi not amused
http://www.indianexpress.com/news/

Mumbai: British Foreign Secretary David Miliband’s first visit to India ended on a controversial
note today as New Delhi took offence to his comments seeking to link the Kashmir dispute to
Lashkar-e-Toiba and terrorism in the region even as he expressed faith in Pakistan’s judicial
system to try the perpetrators of 26/11 and referred to the poor status of Muslims in India.

David Miliband comments on Kashmir welcomed by 'terrorist' group
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/

The statement will cause further discomfort for Mr Miliband after India reacted angrily to his
'interference' in the issue and senior politicians branded his trip a 'disaster'. In an article ahead of
his visit to India last week, the foreign secretary said the 'war on terror' had been mistaken and
that individual groups like LeT should be targeted and brought to justice. But solving the Kashmir
issue would deny LeT its 'call to arms' and free Pakistan to fight al-Qaeda and Taliban militants in
its tribal areas.

Miliband Comments Spark India Row
Foreign Secretary David Miliband is at the centre of a media storm in India after his recent trip to
the country.
http://news.sky.com/skynews

0.3
He has managed to stir up a hornet's nest of a controversy by publicly airing his views on the
most sensitive of Indian topics - Kashmir - during his visit last week. He has apparently managed
to upset the Indian establishment so much that the current trip by the Business Secretary Peter
Mandelson looks like being overshadowed. Newspapers here say the Indian Prime Minister has
written to Gordon Brown about the matter - although Downing Street stresses no such letter has
been received. And Mr Mandelson has found himself having to explain away his cabinet
colleague's remarks, which have dogged his own trip.

India rattled
http://news.bbc.co.uk/

India is waiting to see how President Obama deals with the nuclear agreement signed with Bush.
India has already been rattled by a comment by Mr Obama on CNN that the US should help
resolve the Kashmir dispute. The Indian media has criticised an essay that I wrote with fellow
Afghan analysts, Barnett Rubin in Foreign Affairs magazine this month urging the US to pressure
Delhi to do more to resolve its disputes with Islamabad so that the Pakistan army could feel less
threatened by India and divert more resources to fighting militancy.

A couple of years back I used to take part in discussions on different topics, which I usually do
when I am jobless, Kashmir was one of them. Following pages will give you an idea of how
common people in India, Pakistan and elsewhere in the world feel about the Kashmir problem. A
few threads covering the discussion have been included in this collection. The participants, those
who took part in the discussions, have their profiles which have been kept as these were chosen
by those individuals and almost every thing has been include without any correction, as much as
possible, or change in the format.

I dedicate this collection of mine to those who took part in the following discussions, to my My late
Father Syed Allah Bux, My late uncle Syed Najiullah, friends, and family who have always helped
me at the time of need.

Syed Jaffer

0.4
Contents
(Discussion Threads)

1 Preface 0.1 to 0.5
2 Bhutto’s speech to the un 1.1 to 1.8
3 Instrument of accretion on 2.1 to 2.23
4 East Pakistan the end game 3.1 to 3.13
5 What s the solution of Kashmir in ur mind 4.1 to 4.5
6 Instrument of accession on IPFC 5.1 to 5.28
7 Brazil in security council do you agree 6.1 to 6.14
8 India and Kashmir issue 7.1 to 7.66
9 Kashmir issue 8.1 to 8.27
10 Musharraf refused offer of Indian helicopters 9.1 to 9.23
11 Pakistan’s plea to India 10.1 to 10.19
12 PLZ FOR GOD SAKE ITS TIME FOR PEACE 11.1 to 11.11
13 Terrorism strikes India once again 12.1 to 12.27
14 Time to take notice 13.1 to 13.3

0.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Community Zulfikar Ali Bhutto
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=187664&tid=24310497&start=1

Topic: Bhutto's speech to the un

Bhutto's speech to the un 9/17/2005 10:41 AM
i really want to read the text of the speech that bhutto gave to the un security council, i thnk
in 1965......... the one where he said "we will wage war for a thousand years......" i know
that there are books on bhutto's speeches but i would really like to get my hands on this
Ayesha particualr speech ASAP. could some one be nice enough to tell me what website i could
look up. thanx
9/21/2005 10:18 AM
yaaa he said that my country izzz in danger n we r waisting our time over here n crop da
paper n all pakiz cum out from de assembly.......but sorry 2 say he was drunk at dat time...i
listen 4m my elderz...

A.J(asad)
9/22/2005 6:45 AM
Jammu and Kashmir is not an integral part of India and has never been an integral part of
India. Jammu and Kashmir is a territory disputed between India and Pakistan. It is more a
part of Pakistan than it can ever be of India, with all the eloquence and with all the
extravagance with words displayed by India. The people of Jammu and Kashmir are part of
the people of Pakistan in blood, in flesh, in life-----kith and kin of ours, in culture, in
geography, in history and in every way and in every form. They are a part of the people of
Pakistan.

We will wage war for a thousand years, a war of defence. I told that to the Security Council
a year ago when that body, in all its wisdom and in all its power, was not prepared to give
us even a resolution. The Security Council felt that we had brought a dead horse to this
council that we were trying to make internal propaganda. But the world must know that the
100 million people of Pakistan will never abandon their pledges and promises. The Indians
many abandon their pledges and promises; we shall never abandon ours, irrespective of
Syed our size and of our resources. We shall fight to the end, but we shall fight in self- defence;
we shall fight for honor. We are not aggressors; we are the victims of aggression. It was
the duty of the Security Council to pronounce itself on who is the aggressor and who is the
aggressed; it is Pakistan that is the victim of aggression.

These are two paragraphs form the “Address to the Twelve Hundred and Forty-fourth
Meeting of the Security Council on September 22, 1965”.

The book is “Important Speeches and Press Conferences of Zulfikar ali Bhutto Foreign
Minister of Pakistan”. The book has around 760 pages, printed at the Inter Services Press
Ltd., Karachi J-228 June 1966
9/22/2005 6:46 AM
Recalling those days I like to put my own views here. Like it is today in those days also the
UN was unable to solve any of the problems which were contrary to the wishes of the
super powers the USSR and the USA. To each action which went in favour of Pakistan
USSR was always there to Veto the move. We the youth in the weaker countries were
seriously thinking of quitting the UNO, I was a college boy in those days. It was speculated
in those days that Dr. Ahmed Suikarno of Indonesia was actually planning such an event
where all the poor and helpless countries of the third world were to join the organization of
the poor. Below I like to copy the last paragraph of the same speech. It is very difficult to
feel the pain felt by ZAB due to the ineffectiveness of the organization just by reading the
extracts; you should read the whole speech to grasp the heat of the event. I don’t know
Syed how many of you have faced a situation when you are on correct path and still punished for
no reason.

I am not saying that in the form of an ultimatum. I am saying it as I am honour bound to
respect the very purposes of the Charter. In leaving the United Nations, Pakistan will be
fulfilling the Charter of the United Nations. And then one third or more of the world will be
outside the organization.

1.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

9/22/2005 7:14 AM
@A.J(asad)
Dear Asad. What you are referring to is the polish resolution. Your elders might have given
you their perspective. I like you to read what I have to say, and judge for yourself, in the
given situation what would you do.

It was the 1971 war and resulting UN meeting. This was the time when Pakistan was about
to breakup. India and its allies were delaying any resolution and waiting for the Dhaka to
Syed fall in the Indian hands. I have not seen the text of polish resolutions. But know for sure
that the resolution was not in favour of Pakistan and all the movers of that resolution were
worst enemies of our country. All those in favour of the polish resolution were having
military pacts with India.
Thank You 9/23/2005 5:32 AM
First of all, let me thank you Syed Sahib, for making us aware of our national history. But
beyond that i had like a favour, can you please create an entire online version of this very
speech...or do you know where i could find the video on the internet.Thank You.
Regards

Ayesha
9/23/2005 8:13 PM
It hurts to admit that we as a nation have a very rich heritage and how we preserve it. The
PTV had a rich collection of videos and films pertaining to all the events relating to Bhutto.
During Zia’s regime that record was systematically burnt, if at all the videos are available
these will be from the personal collections of people who love Bhutto.

Syed As for the speech subject of present discussion I have requested my daughter to type it
out. I will put that on this very thread
9/24/2005 1:38 AM
Address by Zulfikar Ali Bhutto to the twelve Hundred and Forty-Fourth Meeting of the
Security Council on September 22, 1965

Mr. President,

I am thankful to you and to the members of the Security Council for having met at this late
hour to discuss a matter of vital importance to my people, to the sub-continent, to Asia, and
perhaps to the world at large. In expressing my gratitude I would like to address not only
the permanent members but also the other members of the Security Council for having
taken the trouble to be with us this morning. I have come direct from Pakistan, and I have
requested this meeting because the issues that face us are indeed so fundamental and
important that it is necessary for us to meet to dilate upon them.

I am thankful also to the Secretary-General for his endeavors to bring about a meaningful
settlement between India and Pakistan. We are aware of all his efforts; we are grateful to
him and to the Security Council; we are grateful to all peace-loving countries for having
taken such a direct interest in a war which we do not want, which has been imposed on us
by a predatory aggressor.
Syed
Pakistan is a small country. You have only to look at a map of the world and see our size to
be aware of our resources and our ability.

We are facing a great monster, a great aggressor always given to aggression. During the
sixteen or seventeen years of our independence we have seen India commit aggression
time and again. Ever since 1947, India has followed the road of aggression. It committed
aggression against Junagadh, against Manavadar, against Mangrol, against Hyderabad
and against Gova. It brought about a situation which has caused the Sino-Indian conflict. It
has committed aggression against Pakistan. And Pakistan, according to Indian leaders, is
its enemy number one. Pakistan is supposed to be the country which is the fulcrum of
India’s fundamental policies.

From 1947 we have been faced with this situation. We have always known that India is
determined to annihilate

1.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

9/24/2005 1:39 AM
food-neighbourly relations with India. He knows that from the very beginning our President,
from the time he came into office, has made positive gestures to India to establish good-
neighbourly relations with his country. We have taken many initiatives to bring peace,
tranquility and friendship between Pakistan and India. These are matters of record, not a
question of propaganda, of trying to get kudos. These are tangible and well-known facts of
history: that ever since he has become President of Pakistan he has gone out of his way to
establish good relations with India by co-operation in every field-co-operation in trade, in
economics and in politics. Has the world forgotten that in 1959 it was the President of
Pakistan who made an offer to India to disengage, to bring about a meaningful settlement
so that our armies do not face each other in an eyeball-to-eyeball stance, so that we may
take care of our own difficulties?

These are matters of record, matters of history. Thus we want good-neighbourly relations
with India; we want peace and friendship with India. But that peace and friendship must be
Syed peace with honour and it must be peace of a self-respecting sovereign State. India must
accept that. India must know that peace can be established only on the basis of self-
respect and honour, on the basis of its own commitments, on the basis of its won pledges,
on the basis of its own promises to the people of Pakistan, to the people of India, to the
world at large and, above all, to the people of Jammu and Kashmir.

Jammu and Kashmir is not an integral part of India and has never been an integral part of
India. Jammu and Kashmir is a territory disputed between India and Pakistan. It is more a
part of Pakistan than it can ever be if India, with all the eloquence and with all the
extravagance with words displayed by India. The people of Jammu and Kashmir are part of
the people of Pakistan in blood, in flesh, in life-kith and kin of ours, in
9/24/2005 1:40 AM
Pakistan.

Pakistan’s basic principle was the bringing about of a permanent settlement between the
two major communities. For seven hundred years we sought to achieve equilibrium
between the people of the two major communities. We believed eventually that the only
way to live in lasting peace with India was to establish our own homeland, to establish a
country smaller in are, but nevertheless capable of having a relationship, a modus vivendi,
with a great and powerful neighbor. That was one of the prime factors responsible for the
creation of Pakistan. We know that in Europe certain countries have had the separate in
order to get closer together; Sweden and Norway, for instance, had to separate in order to
get closer to on another. We believed that with the creation of Pakistan we would be able
to establish a permanent peace, a permanent understanding, b between the people of
India and people of Pakistan.

We are a smaller country and, as said, our resources are limited; one has only to look at a
Syed map of the world and a map of the sub-continent to see that. We are not interested in war.
We do not want aggression; we do not want conflict. We want peace in order that our
people can develop. This is the age of rising expectation. We should like to see all our
energies and all our efforts directed towards economic well-being. It is not the low of God
that people in Asia and Africa should be poor. It is not a predestined rule or an immutable
law that they should always remain in poverty. We want to break the barriers of poverty; we
want to give our people a better life; we want our children to have a better future.

The leaders of Asia and Africa are determined to break the barriers and legacies of the
past. In order to do so we must channel all our resources for productive ends, for a
peaceful and purposeful future. This is a dire need for a country such as Pakistan.

9/24/2005 1:41 AM
We do not want conflict. We are not for war. We do not want to see the extermination of
peoples. We respect and have regard for the people of India. A few years ago we were
part of the same country, but, for the reason which I have stated, we were obliged to
separate. By means of separation we had thought that our people would be brought closer
together, that we should bring about harmony, understanding and tranquility. The basic
idea in the creation of Pakistan was that the areas occupied by the Muslim majority should
form Pakistan. This basic principle was accepted by the Indian leaders. All we ask is to live
Syed in peace, friendship and goodwill with India on the basis of the understanding and
agreements which the Indian government and the Indian leaders themselves solemnly
pledged to my people and my country.

1.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Today we are fighting a war, a war imposed on us by India, a naked, predatory,
unwarranted aggression by 450 million people against 100 million people, a war of
chauvinism and aggrandizement by a mighty neighbor against a smaller country. It is as if,
in Europe, France or Germany committed aggression against Denmark. It is as if a small
country in South America were subjected to aggression by Argentina or Brazil. It is as if the
United States waged a war against a small country.

We don not want to be exterminated. We cherish life. We want to live; we want our people
to live; we want our people to progress. But today our cities are being bombed
indiscriminately by the might of India, by the formidable machine of the Indian armed
forces.

This will not, however, deter us from seeking justice. We are resolved to fight for our
honour, to fight for Pakistan, because we are the victims of aggression. Aggression has
been committed against the soil of Pakistan. Irrespective of our size, irrespective of our
resources, we have the resolve, we have the will, to fight because ours is a just cause.
Ours is a righteous cause. We are wedded to principle. We are wedded to our
9/24/2005 1:41 AM
own pledges. We believe in the right of self-determination------a Wilsonian right, as I told
you this evening, sir, a concept which has inspired the whole of Asia and Africa. It is a
phenomenon that cannot be stopped; and that is why we are fighting. We are fighting with
our backs to the wall, but we shall fight with all determination, irrespective of the odds and
of all the forces that are pitted against us.

The secretary-general, as I have already said, has made some very constructive
suggestions, and we are grateful to him. He is not only the Secretary-General of the United
Nations; he is also a great Asian from a great Asian neighbor of Pakistan and of India. And
we should like to co-operate with him both in his capacity as the Secretary-General and as
a leader of a great Asian country. We have had useful discussions with him in Pakistan,
and we told him that are for peace.

We do not want war, we do not want destruction and we do not want disaster. But it should
be a meaningful peace, a purposeful peace, a peace for all time, a peace in which India
Syed and Pakistan can live as good neighbours. We are neighbours and we want to live as good
neighbours. We do not want to have conflict and trouble with India for all time. No people
would want that

We are a smaller country. The cardinal principle of Pakistan’s foreign policy has been to
establish good-neighbourly relations with all countries, with all its neighbours----and India is
our principal neighbours. All our efforts to establish good-neighbourly relations with all
other countries would be in vain if we are not able to establish good-neighbourly relations
with India, which, as I have said, for historical political and geographical reasons is our
principal neighbor. We will make every endeavor to establish such relations. The Indian
representative, whom I know well and for whom I have great regard, is aware of the efforts
we have made to establish
9/24/2005 1:42 AM
principles to be negated and destroyed by sheer force and power.

Having made those remarks, I have the honour to transmit the following message from the
President of Pakistan, which I have just received from Rawalpindi.
“Pakistan considers Security Council resolution 211 of 20 September as unsatisfactory.
However, in the interests of international peace and in order to enable the Security Council
to evolve a self-executing procedure which will lead to an honorable settlement of the root
cause of the present conflict”_
Namely, the Jammu and Kashmir dispute_
“I have issued the following order to the Pakistan armed forces they will stop fighting as
from 1205 hours West Pakistan time today. As from that time they will not fire on enemy
forces unless fired upon, provided the Indian Government issues similar orders to its
Syed armed forces…”

Thus, in response to the call of international peace and international goodwill, we have
ordered our troops to cease hostilities, provided India agrees to such a cessation of
hostilities.

But a cessation of hostilities is not enough. The Security Council-the most important organ
of the United Nations-must now address itself to the heart of the problem. For eighteen

1.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

years it has played and toyed with the future of Kashmir. It can no longer make a plaything
or a toy out of 5 million people. It is the moral responsibility of the Security Council to
address itself to a meaningful and lasting solution of the problem of Jammu and Kashmir.

The Security Council has been seized of this problem for eighteen years. There are more
documents, more resolution on Jammu and Kashmir- the most fundamental problem facing
the world today-than on any other problem. Is it not ironical that with regard to a conflict
that may lead to world conflagration-and the present situation has shown that it is possible
for this conflict to lead to world conflagration-the Security Council has shown lethargy and
indolence?
9/24/2005 1:43 AM
I was here a year ago, and the Security Council was not prepared to give Pakistan a piece
of paper called a resolution. It did not even want to consider the problem. It thought that
this was a dead issue, or that it was dormant. This can never be a dead issue; it can never
be dormant.

This is now the last chance for the Security Council to put all its force, all its energy, all its
moral responsibility behind a fair and equitable and honorable solution of the Jammu and
Kashmir dispute. History does not wait for councils, organizations or institutions, just as it
does not wait for individuals. Ultimately we shall have to be the final determiners of our
own course. Let me tell the Security Council, on behalf of my government, that if now, after
this last chance that we are giving the Security Council, it does not put its full force, full
moral responsibility and full weight behind and equitable and honorable settlement of the
Jammu and Kashmir dispute, Pakistan will have to leave the United Nations.

Syed We have decided to give the untied nations a last opportunity to determine what it can do
towards a purposeful, peaceful and lasting settlement of the problem of Jammu and
Kashmir. We shall give the United Nations a time-limit. Within a certain period of time, if the
Security Council is not able to act in accordance with the responsibility placed on it, in
accordance with its honour under the Charter which believes in self-determination,
Pakistan will have to withdraw from the United Nations.

I am not saying that in form of an ultimatum. I am saying it as I am honour bound to respect
the very purposes of the Charter. In leaving the United Nations, Pakistan will be fulfilling
that charter of the United Nations. And then one third or more of the world will be outside
this Organization.
9/24/2005 1:43 AM
culture, in geography, in history and in every way in every form. They are a part of the
people of Pakistan.

We will wage war for a thousand years, a war of defence. I told that to the Security Council
a year ago when that body, in all its wisdom and in all its power, was not prepared to give
us even a resolution. The Security Council felt that we had brought a dead horse to this
Council that we were trying to make internal propaganda. But the world must know that the
100 million people of Pakistan will abandon their pledges and promises; we shall never
abandon ours irrespective of our size and of our resources. We shall fight to the end, but
we shall fight in self-defence; we shall fight for the honour. We are not aggressors; we are
the victims of aggression. It was the duty of the Security Council to pronounce itself on who
is the aggressor and who is the aggressed; it is Pakistan that is the victim of aggression.

I am not referring here to some of the remarks made by countries which have no right to be
here; they are not even countries. I am referring to the great powers; I am referring to those
Syed who believe in the cause of justice, in the cause of righteousness and in the cause of
honour. After all, history is not in vain. Wars have been fought in the past ad people have
upheld great causes. I am referring to the great powers and also to those other countries in
the Security Council which have espoused the cause of righteousness. We are grateful to
all of you for whatever you have done to uphold the cause of justice because, finally and
ultimately, justice must prevail. We believe more than ever before that justice is bound to
prevail for the people of Jammu and Kashmir. Five million people must have the right to
decide their own future. Why should they be made an exception?

Should the whole phenomenon of self-determination, stretching from Asia and Africa, apply
to the whole world excepting the people of Jammu and Kashmir? Are they

1.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

9/24/2005 1:43 AM
some outcasts of Indian society? Are they some untouchable pariahs that they should not
be given the right to self-determination, that they should not be allowed to have the right to
their own future? The great country of France permitted the Algerians to exercise the right
of self-determination. The right of self determination is a Wilsonian concept. The Soviet
Union believes in the right of self-determination of all peoples. The whole world believes in
the right of self-determination. Must it be denied to the people of Jammu and Kashmir
merely because power must prevail over principle? Power shall never prevail over
principle. Finally and ultimately, principle must prevail over power. This is a Christian
concept, it is an Islamic concept, and it is a civilized concept. Those nations which do not
believe in such a concept must face the ultimate consequences.

India is isolated today. India, in spite of its size and its resources, has no one to support it
openly. The whole of Asia and Africa supports the right of self-determination of the people
of Kashmir. The Arab countries, in Casablanca, have supported the right of self-
Syed determination for the people of Kashmir. European countries have supported the right of
self-determination for the people of Kashmir. The Secretary of State of the United States of
America, Mr. Dean Rusk, said that the historical position is a plebiscite in Kashmir. On the
one hand, you have the whole world arrayed on the side of the cause of right and justice
and morality, and, on the other hand, you have a war machine, an arrogant and
chauvinistic state breaking its pledges, breaking its promises and wanting to destroy the
will and the spirit of people. The will and spirit of our people can never be destroyed. Let
me tell you: you can have one cease-fire, you can have another cease-fire, but the 100
million people of Pakistan shall face extermination rather than forsake their principles or
allow their
9/24/2005 5:40 AM
principles or allow their principles to be negated and destroyed by sheer force and power.

Having made those remarks, I have the honour to transmit the following message from the
President of Pakistan, which I have just received from Rawalpindi.
“Pakistan considers Security Council resolution 211 of 20 September as unsatisfactory.
However, in the interests of international peace and in order to enable the Security Council
to evolve a self-executing procedure which will lead to an honorable settlement of the root
cause of the present conflict”_
Namely, the Jammu and Kashmir dispute_
“I have issued the following order to the Pakistan armed forces they will stop fighting as
from 1205 hours West Pakistan time today. As from that time they will not fire on enemy
forces unless fired upon, provided the Indian Government issues similar orders to its
armed forces…”

Thus, in response to the call of international peace and international goodwill, we have
ordered our troops to cease hostilities, provided India agrees to such a cessation of
hostilities.
Syed
But a cessation of hostilities is not enough. The Security Council-the most important organ
of the United Nations-must now address itself to the heart of the problem. For eighteen
years it has played and toyed with the future of Kashmir. It can no longer make a plaything
or a toy out of 5 million people. It is the moral responsibility of the Security Council to
address itself to a meaningful and lasting solution of the problem of Jammu and Kashmir.

The Security Council has been seized of this problem for eighteen years. There are more
documents, more resolution on Jammu and Kashmir- the most fundamental problem facing
the world today-than on any other problem. Is it not ironical that with regard to a conflict
that may lead to world conflagration-and the present situation has shown that it is possible
for this conflict to lead to world conflagration-the Security Council has shown lethargy and
indolence?
9/24/2005 5:41 AM
I was here a year ago, and the Security Council was not prepared to give Pakistan a piece
of paper called a resolution. It did not even want to consider the problem. It thought that
this was a dead issue, or that it was dormant. This can never be a dead issue; it can never
be dormant.

This is now the last chance for the Security Council to put all its force, all its energy, all its
Syed moral responsibility behind a fair and equitable and honorable solution of the Jammu and
Kashmir dispute. History does not wait for councils, organizations or institutions, just as it
does not wait for individuals. Ultimately we shall have to be the final determiners of our

1.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

own course. Let me tell the Security Council, on behalf of my government, that if now, after
this last chance that we are giving the Security Council, it does not put its full force, full
moral responsibility and full weight behind and equitable and honorable settlement of the
Jammu and Kashmir dispute, Pakistan will have to leave the United Nations.

We have decided to give the untied nations a last opportunity to determine what it can do
towards a purposeful, peaceful and lasting settlement of the problem of Jammu and
Kashmir. We shall give the United Nations a time-limit. Within a certain period of time, if the
Security Council is not able to act in accordance with the responsibility placed on it, in
accordance with its honour under the Charter which believes in self-determination,
Pakistan will have to withdraw from the United Nations.

I am not saying that in form of an ultimatum. I am saying it as I am honour bound to respect
the very purposes of the Charter. In leaving the United Nations, Pakistan will be fulfilling
that charter of the United Nations. And then one third or more of the world will be outside
this Organization.
Thank u SYED Sahib... 9/30/2005 6:22 AM
Dear Syed Sahib,
I don't know about other's but i am very thankful to you for this speech i love Bhutto
sahib very much but i love also those people's who love's Bhutto. Syed Sahib you are
included in my ideal personalities & one day inshallah i'll meet u when i am able to meet u,
ATI if you don't mind may i add you in orkut i promise i don't disturb you i think i can learn much
from you
thank you
10/1/2005 8:27 PM
Audio recording of the last part of the speech:
http://www.historychannel.com/speeches/archive/speech_19.html
Mujji

Back 2 da future... 10/5/2005 4:52 AM
you should go the www.bhutto.org where there are all the speeches Martyr Bhutto, did.
Thanks.

SsarFarazZ
10/5/2005 10:18 AM
i once read an itneresting detail in a very interesting book. it was regarding the much
romanticized speech that dear zulfi cut short while tearing his notes in a sensational
gesture, and saying, with all his eloquence, "my country harkens me.." left the UN, at the
time of war with india.

the interesting detail in the book says that bhutto sahab had it all planned out, his
theatrics, and so excited was the teenage benazir about it all, that she called up one of her
friends and told her to watch the UN proceedings the next day and see how dashingly her
Hussain famous papa will behave.

none of my making up. its in the book. a very interesting one, i must say.

called "The Terrorist Prince"

about Mir Murtaza Bhutto
10/20/2005 9:01 PM
Not all the books are to bring you what is true. Please always remember that the book
reflects the political philosophy of the respective author and made colourful to make it
commercially viable. Leave alone a particular book, the contemporary history 99 % of the
time is biased in favour of the ruler. Please see the following link and the following
paragraphs copied for you convenience. You will find some discussion on a related topic
you may find it interesting.

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=927339&tid=5043269&start=1&na=2&nid=
Syed
Bajwa and Rabbani are not honest people if they were honest they should have produced
the text of the Simla Agreement in the text books and argued point by point to make their
point. I know of these books my own children have read these books in their O Levels and
in foundation year of professional degree. I taught to them that this is the truth but you

1.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

must write what is taught to you in the schools and colleges.

As a student of O Levels you have the liberty to put both the views and can get away
securing the marks. But if you are appearing through some Pakistani board you have no
chance of getting marks and praising Bhutto at the same time. Our ruling clique can do
any thing to remain in absolute power. Bhutto died 28 years ago but our ruling
establishment and bureaucrats with or without uniform are afraid of him. They can mislead
their own coming generations to discredit Bhutto.

My additional post is to make sure that trying to speak the truth you may fail in your
exams. In my BSc I have been a victim of such situation. I failed trying to write the logic
and truth in the examination. If the examiner is a Bhutto fan you will get away but if the
examiner happens to be one of the disciples of Bajwa/Rabbani then you had it. All the kids
please take care.

1.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=20216690
United Nations

Topic: Kashmir - Instrument of Accession!

Kashmir - Instrument of Accession! 8/12/2005 6:02 AM
The Instrument of Accession is a standard document which India used to sign in as many
as 550 odd Princely States and Kingdoms into the Indian Union.
This legal document was an unconditional document entered into by the said
Principlaity/Kingdom and India.

This was the standard document that was signed by the Maharaja of Kashmir on October
26, 1947.

Read the scanned copy of the Original Instrument of Accession and note that the entire
agreement has been filled in a standardised format.

The signatory for India was the Governor General of independent India, Lord Mountbatten.

I specifically created this thread so that the international community may read the
Bhaskar document as also the Pakistanis who have been fed lies on the subject as part of their
curriculum.

The Instrument of Accession forms the basis of India's claim of Jammu and Kashmir.
Naturally, only one country can have a sole and legal claim over land and in this
case it is India. It is a legally binding and valid claim on Kashmir just as India has a legal
and valid claim on all the 550 odd states that were thus signed and incorporated into the
Indian Union in 1947.

-----------------------------------------
Do not post on this thread unless you have anything meaningful and relevant to say
about the Instrument of Accession. That is the topic here.
-----------------------------------------
8/15/2005 4:26 AM
I have gone through the scanned images of the so called document. The quality of the
images does not reflect the advancement India claims to have made in information
technology. The official website of your home office where the document in question exists
is designed and hosted by National Informatics Centre (NIC) Driving the next generation
Government.

The page entitled Accession and Consolidation under Jammu and Kashmir has links to
Overview History & Civilization Accession & Consolidation Militancy, Peace.
The link militancy and peace lead us to no where. The home office is yet to decide what to
write about militancy and peace how to feed their population with lies and twisted facts.

This webpage gives you the chronology of event full of twisted facts and half truths which
the Indian government has always been feeding to its subjects. If you go through the
image the so-called document of accession does not bear any seal of the governor general
Syed of India or the maharaja. Mount Batten being poor in English like me did not ask his
secretary for editing correcting and retyping the document before putting his signature on
it. And the clauses 5, 7 and 8 of the so-called instrument of accession say:

“5. The terms of this my Instrument of Accession shall not be varied by any amendment of
the Act or the Indian Independence Act, 1947, unless such amendment is accepted by me
by Instrument supplementary to this Instrument.”

7. Nothing in this Instrument shall be deemed to commit in any way to acceptance of any
future constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into arrangement with the
Government of India under any such future constitution.
8/15/2005 4:29 AM
8. Nothing in this Instrument affects the continuance of my Sovereignty in and over this
State, or, save as provided by or under this Instrument, the exercise of any powers,
authority and rights now enjoyed by me as Ruler of this State or the validity of any law at
present in force in this State.
Syed Bhasker when will you grow up why you and your leaders are so stupid?

2.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Your web page says:
The All Jammu & Kashmir National Conference - resolution - convening a constituent
assembly - adult suffrage - determining its future shape and affiliation, including its
accession to India - to frame a Constitution - October, 1950.
The Constituent Assembly formed after elections - September, 1951.
The historic "Delhi Agreement" - Kashmiri leaders and the Government of India - dynamic
nature of constitutional relationship between the state of Jammu & Kashmir and the Indian
Union - reaffirmed its accession to India - July 24, 1952.
The Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir adopted by the Constituent Assembly - November,
1956 - came into effect - January 26, 1957

Un Resolution adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January
1957, concerning the India–Pakistan Question says
Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial
plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,
8/15/2005 4:32 AM
1. Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have taken
or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or
any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such action by the
Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above
principles;
2. Decides to continue its consideration of the dispute.

Your web site says:
The historic "Shimla Agreement" - between India and Pakistan - all previous
pronouncements on Kashmir superceded - all issues relating to Jammu & Kashmir to be
settled bilaterally - the cease-fire line converted to the Line of Control (LOC) - July 3, 1972.
The Kashmir accord concluded - Prime Minister of India - "Clock cannot be put back";
Kashmiri leadership - "Accession of the state of Jammu & Kashmir to India is not a matter
in issue" - February, 1975.
Syed
The simla pact says:
In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-fire of December 17,
1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of
either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences
and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use
of force in violation of this line.
Both Governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually
convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides
will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of
durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions of repatriation of
prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the
resumption of diplomatic relations.
8/15/2005 4:35 AM
Your say: I specifically created this thread so that the international community may read
the document as also the Pakistanis who have been fed lies on the subject as part of their
curriculum.

I write: I specifically reply this thread so that the international community may read the
document as also the Indians who have been fed lies on the subject as part of their
Syed curriculum.
Who says that people from the international community want to read what you write.
Syed 8/15/2005 4:39 AM
I notice that as usual you have nothing meaningful to say other than remark on the quality
of the scan put up, comment on the non-availability of certain links in this particular govt
web-site and comment on the English.
Bhaskar I presume you have kept other imaginative avenues of digression from topic for future use.

2.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Though nothing can be done about the English in an already signed original document that
is now close to 58 years old, India would definitely try to work on scan quality and updation
of all its links to better suit your tastes.
Syed 8/15/2005 4:47 AM
13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15), that the final
disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the will of
the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,

There you go again bringing in the UN whenever it suits you. When I ask you questions
you suddenly disappear from the thread and only to spout the same garbage months later.

I repeat my question to you. The UN asked Pakistan in 1948 to vacate the Kashmir area
occupied by Pakistan as a result of invasion, of all its civilians, material and army, so that a
Bhaskar plebiscite could be held.

1. Why didn't Pakistan do it?

2. Why is Pakistan talking about the UN after being a signatory to the Simla
Agreement in 1972 that all Kashmir related issues will be resolved bilaterally?

Answer this and don't run away again without doing so.
Syed 8/15/2005 4:59 AM
There is absolutely no contradiction between what the website states and the Simla
Agreement.
The website only reiterates that the Instrument of Accession of Kashmir is not under any
question, contention or dispute and this reaffirms the fact that Kashmir acceded to India.

Are you disputing the fact that Kashmir acceded to India, like you disputed the fact
that Pakistanis invaded Kashmir in Sep-Oct 1947 and then had to keep quiet when
confronted with proof, earlier in this very community?

Further, it only indicates your deep felt embarrassment and resultant hatred at being
shown poorly by India that Kashmir rightfully belongs to it, when you say nobody in this
Bhaskar community would bother to read the scan of the original Instrument of Accession of
Kashmir to India .

You shouldn't have then been replying to this topic at all in the first place.
It must really burn your heart to see the scan and prove the liars that you all are. Guys like
you have shamelessly lied to several generations of Pakis and feel no remorse for it. You
should be really proud of the Paki school curriculum that preached hate for India and
Hindus that I had put up earlier.
So proud that you did not dare comment on it here.
8/15/2005 3:31 PM
Bhaskar & Co. is failed to bash Pakistan this time..

I must say "Well done Bhaskar". If you dont waist time here to degrade Pakistan & use this
time for the development of your own country, I'm sure, your country will progress.

The Such long posts help no body, reality doesn't change with such topics/posts on Orkut.
Patriotic Reality is something different. Try to realize that you've done good for your country, I mean
to say, you're running on the track your Govt provided. Now its time to do something extra-
ordinary for your dearest country.

Happy Independence Day!
May God make your country peaceful.
8/16/2005 11:38 AM
May God make your country peaceful.

look who is speaking!!!
Kedar

2.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/16/2005 12:00 PM
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=19025678
i remember there were more posts in there than 7 n i have asked u a question there i m
still waiting

Mutawassam
8/17/2005 11:33 PM
Poor Bhasker

I specifically created this thread so that the international community may read the
document as also the Pakistanis who have been fed lies on the subject as part of their
curriculum.

I was waiting to see the reaction of the international community on your post. I conclude
that no one takes you seriously. Every one knows that what you write and the official stand
of your Indian government is based on lies.
Syed If at all there was any instrument of accession in existence as early as October 26, 1947,
why India failed to make it official and bring it on the official record of UN. Please check
and let me know if it is on the UN record.

I will take your reply to answer it point by point giving time gaps so that the topic remains
highlighted and is able to attract the attention of international community as you desire.
Syed et al 8/17/2005 11:43 PM
If at all there was any instrument of accession in existence as early as October 26, 1947,
why India failed to make it official and bring it on the official record of UN. Please check
and let me know if it is on the UN record.

You seem to suffer from a terrible case of foot in the mouth disease, as do several of your
countrymen.
The copy of the Instrument of Accession
is very much part of the UN records.

A couple of months back, I gave you several links on the topic including one that presented
India's case on Kashmir to the UN in 1957.
You obviously didn't bother to read it.
Bhaskar If you had, you would've known that all Kashmir related documentation copies related to
India's case formed part of the document set provided to the UN then.

You still function from your own hole of ignorance and denial despite being pointed to the
fact that Pakistan has never have questioned the authenticity of the IoA at the UN.

I've on several occasions asked many a Paki for Pakistan's official position on the matter,
but have never got a response on the matter. Do you guys even know what your country's
position is?
I have no doubt that you don't.
8/17/2005 11:45 PM
You have mischievous mind and child like attitude it becomes necessary to explain why we
respond to you posts.

To keep the record straight.
Syed
8/17/2005 11:49 PM
Give me the UN link not the Indian one or some private web by an Indian.

Syed
8/17/2005 11:58 PM
Give me the UN link not the Indian one or some private web by an Indian.

2.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Bhaskar Why don't you read the links that I've already given you, you moron.
And I have given you a scanned copy of the document, and that seems to have kept you
tongue tied.

The scanned copy of an original official document of India will only be hosted by India on
its official webistes and not by the UN which was not disputing or questioning the
Accession in any case.

Pakistan didn't go to the UN disputing the Accession. They just decided to invade Kashmir
instead even before the Maharaja could make up his mind, and present the Maharaja with
a fait accompli.

As usual you have nothing of substance to say on the Kashmir issue.
8/18/2005 12:02 AM
To keep the record straight.

You guys are neither straight nor do you have records that you can furnish.
Bhaskar Little wonder Pakis pull out all their arguments, on any subject, out of the air and are
unable to back them up or substantiate them.
8/18/2005 12:08 AM
JUST TELL ME IS IT ON THE
UN OFFICIAL
RECORD OR NOT.
If it is give me the link.
Syed
8/18/2005 12:19 AM
JUST TELL ME IS IT ON THE
UN OFFICIAL RECORD OR NOT.

When documents are provided to the UN they go on official record don't they, as part of
Bhaskar the submissions made by a country on an issue?
Did I have to explain this to you?
8/18/2005 12:33 AM
It means only you and the Indian government are the ones who know that the instrument of
accession is on the UN record.

Your profile: passion says Dreaming.
Syed Please wake up you are wasting peoples time.

8/18/2005 12:48 AM
I'll say it slowly this time.
When documents get submitted to the UN they go on record as having been provided to
the UN.
The fact of submission is known to not only India and the UN but to PAKISTAN too.
Since morons like you didn't know about it, you also now know about it. You couldn't have
trusted your army govt to have kept you posted can you?

Bhaskar Have you asked yourself why Pakistan has never ever questioned the Instrument of
Accession at the UN?

You are really pathetic.
8/18/2005 12:56 AM
The fact remains that you are tongue tied by the scanned copy of the Instrument of
Accession.

Now that it is on display, what can you say, eh? Please show the same to me at another
website? How pathetic!

The Instrument of Accession thus conclusively proves that Pakistan has no locus standi let
Bhaskar alone any claim on Kashmir.

The only option for them is to stop dreaming about Kashmir and walk out of the land
occupied by them.

2.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Yes, that and change the name of their country. K in Pakistan will no longer
represent Kashmir! LOL!
8/18/2005 1:09 AM
“Morons = a taboo term that deliberately insults somebody’s intelligence”
Calm down I can understand you state of mind you may hurt yourself.

I know how the records are kept; have an experience of 40 years here and abroad.

As I said earlier I like to give some time for the international community to see your state of
Syed mind and console you.
8/18/2005 1:33 AM
Yeah. Your state of mind is pretty dead right now and understandably so, as you have now
come across the dreaded Instrument of Accession.
Your experience counts for nothing, from what I have seen of you so far in this community
over the last 6 months. Some people remain idiots all their lives.

Syed. Why are you so scared of this legal document? It speaks for itself and exposes your
country doesn't it?
C'mon don't hide inside a hole.
Bhaskar Tell us all how the Instrument of Accession makes you feel.

It further hurts your case that Kashmir was sold to the Maharaja Gulab Singh, Maharaja
Hari Singh's forefather, by the British for a consideration and that is recorded by another
official document signed in the 1840s. Have you read that document too? LOL.
y r u ppl fighting?? 8/18/2005 3:55 AM
bhaskar, isn't it good if we let the govts decide wht should they do abt kashmir?? i hope
everyone here knows that "bilateral talks" in simla accord doesn't at all refer to each n
every indian n pakistani, its abt govts, so we better let them do it while we all should atleast
try to live peacefully:)

Sadia take care........dia
8/18/2005 11:43 AM
@bas kar
i already asked this question to u in some other thread n u never came to answer me now i
ask it again
if u think all kashmiries love to live ith india y than u dont hold referendomn in kashmir ?

Mutawassa
m
8/18/2005 2:13 PM
Indian looser (Bhaskar) is trying again & again to win verbal war here on Orkut. But reality
doesn't change my looser brother. We know the facts, you dont need to come with such
shits like Instrument of Accession.

Such posts will never change the facts that Indian army have killed more than 90,000
The
innocent Kashmiri Muslims in Kashmir. It will not change the fact that India is denying
Patriotic
Kashmiri Muslims their right of self determination as per UNSC resolutions which was also
promised to them by Nehru. It can not change the fact that Indian Army is slaughtering,
raping, burning and killing innocent Kashmiri Muslims and denying their freedom.
8/18/2005 10:27 PM
The document posted on an Indian web has got no legal standing

Be very clear in you mind that The document posted on an Indian web has got no legal
standing. Suppose I agree with your wrong stand than how do you explain the clause 5
and 7 of the instrument.

“5. The terms of this my Instrument of Accession shall not be varied by any amendment of
the Act or the Indian Independence Act, 1947, unless such amendment is accepted by me
Syed by Instrument supplementary to this Instrument.”

Where is the supplementary to this instrument?

2.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

"7. Nothing in this Instrument shall be deemed to commit in any way to acceptance of any
future constitution of India or to fetter my discretion to enter into arrangement with the
Government of India under any such future constitution".

Mean that the Indian government did deceive and tricked the Maharaja also. I repeat again
The document posted on an Indian web has got no legal standing
Syed 8/18/2005 11:10 PM
[ The document posted on an Indian web has got no legal standing]

Syed, do you believe US govt documents put up on US govy websites and those of
Pak put up on Pak govt websites.

The fact that the scan of an official copy is put up on a website and that too a govt one,
does not take away the merit of the document in any way.
You really have all sense of reason, how pathetic.

Bhaskar [“5. The terms of this my Instrument of Accession shall not be varied by any amendment of
the Act or the Indian Independence Act, 1947, unless such amendment is accepted by me
by Instrument supplementary to this Instrument.”]

Where is the supplementary to this instrument?

Did you even understand the clause before you wrote the question? And you calim to have
40 years of international experience? Read it again, I'm not going to spoon feed you.
8/18/2005 11:37 PM
Syed, do you believe US govt documents put up on US govy websites and those of
Pak put up on Pak govt websites.

NO I judge them on merit and the reaction of the honest people with credibility.

Example:

All the references by Collin Powell at the presentation to United Nations regarding the
Syed WMD and al-Qadir links of Saddam were a pack of lies.

So is the document you are referring to.

8/18/2005 11:56 PM
Did you even understand the clause before you wrote the question? And you calim to have
40 years of international experience? Read it again, I'm not going to spoon feed you.

NO

I specifically created this thread so that the international community may read the
document as also the Pakistanis who have been fed lies on the subject as part of their
curriculum.
Syed

Can you please enlighten me, Pakistanis and the international community? Ironically no
one from the international community seems interested in reading and replying to your lies.
8/19/2005 1:05 AM
[Syed, do you believe US govt documents put up on US govy websites and those of
Pak put up on Pak govt websites.]

NO I judge them on merit and the reaction of the honest people with credibility.

Disbelieving a scan? What more credible evidence can one ask for.
It just goes to show that you are intellectually dishonest.
Bhaskar

All the references by Collin Powell at the presentation to United Nations regarding the
WMD and al-Qadir links of Saddam were a pack of lies.

2.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Colin Powell put up a presentation to prove a point based on lies.

This is fact, but I'm hardly surprised that you can't tell fact from lies.
8/19/2005 1:09 AM
[Did you even understand the clause before you wrote the question? And you claim to
have 40 years of international experience? Read it again, I'm not going to spoon feed you.]

NO
Bhaskar
Clearly indicates your state of mind that lives in deep denial inside an even deeper
hole.
8/19/2005 1:13 AM
Collin Powel’s presentation and Indian presentation are lies of same category; to support
an unjust action.

Syed
8/19/2005 1:20 AM
Why don’t you elaborate and explain the clause so that I pull you in to more stupid position
of yours.

Syed
8/19/2005 2:01 AM
Entree in your profile: from my past relationships i learned:
You scribe: I need to grow up!

Why don’t you do the needful?

An Indian king once had a donkey with frozen neck and would not move his neck. The king
called all the specialists from all over the world. Many took chance reward for the success
was plentiful but the punishment was death. All who took chance failed except one; he
went to the donkey and said something in his ear. The donkey started swinging his head at
the neck joints. King was astonished and asked the person the secret of his remedy. The
person said it is my secret. King offered more reward. The person who cured the donkey
Syed said. “mai ney kadhay say pucha oos kay kan mey “tu bihari tow nahi hai”. (I asked the
donkey in his ear if he is a bihari, bihar is the place in India to which Mr. Bhasker belongs.)

No offences to other Biharies some of my very dear friends are form Bihar. They accept
that being Bihari is a feeling that can attack any body in the world.

Which part of east India do you belong to?
8/19/2005 2:16 AM
Collin Powel’s presentation and Indian presentation are lies of same category; to support
an unjust action.

You saying that an original scanned copy is a lie, which stares you in the face, is a lie
Bhaskar doesn't make it so.
It just goes to show that you have lived an entire life believing and propagating a lie.
8/19/2005 2:18 AM
Why don’t you elaborate and explain the clause so that I pull you in to more stupid position
of yours.

What's the matter, 40 years of international experience finds you inept to understand a
Bhaskar simple sentence? You just proved my point that experience doesn't count for anything
when one is an idiot.
8/19/2005 2:20 AM
Entree in your profile: from my past relationships i learned:

Having run out of arguments, not that you had any to begin with, you are searching for
Bhaskar clues to replies for the Instrument of Accession in my profile?
How pathetic.

2.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/19/2005 2:28 AM
bihar is the place in India to which Mr. Bhasker belongs.

No offences to other Biharies some of my very dear friends are form Bihar. They accept
that being Bihari is a feeling that can attack any body in the world.

Which part of east India do you belong to?

If this is what you have inferred from my profile, then you are not only ignorant but stupid
Bhaskar and any Indian here would confirm that.
But that's no news. All Pakis are stupid and every Indian knows that.
No offense to some Pakis who may read this who are my dear friends.

In any case, I see the senile Paki here has run out of arguments and is now trying to figure
out about my Indianness.
What a moron.

8/19/2005 2:30 AM
Actually I was trying to ascertain your age so that I approach you at your level. And came
across you ethnicity and recalled a joke to share with you. No offence.

As for further arguments you will have to wait for the next time when I have the time. In the
Syed mean time be patient and behave like a good kid.
8/19/2005 2:58 AM
Check out the Replies Bhaskar received ,esp. the Crabby's smashes to Bhaskar. They are
awesome.- Smashes to Bhaskar-

Tanzeel
8/19/2005 3:00 AM
And came across you ethnicity

Pray tell me, how did you figure out I was a Bihari or from East India?
I'm still rolling in laughter.

Bhaskar As for my age, you sure don't match up intellectually and that is self-evident.

Only a fool would think that he doesn't need to grow up, at any age.
That's age old wisdom for you, not to be found in any BOOK.
8/20/2005 7:39 AM
Thanks Tanzeel I liked the following Para.

But looks like you are only interested in showing the document, and not dealing with the
history how it came...just one suggestion for your mental satisfaction...take a print-out,
and then put it on a frame, and hang it in your bed room so that every morning you
wake up you can see it and shout "Kashmir is mine, Kashmir is mine"... Just a friendly
suggestion... Crabby and I second.

Agreements treaties are serious documents a number of copies of such documents are
normally made and every signatory gets one. In this case the record of India Pakistan,
Kashmir, and UK should posses the true copies. Check all the UK libraries and let me
know if you find any trace.

This document doesn’t exist any where in the world except for Indian links. People who
Syed have written books about it have never admitted having seen it any where until Bhasker
pointed out the existence of its scanned copy on an Indian government website. What they
have displayed is a forged document.

Raja Singh signs the document on 26 and Mountbatten on the 27 as the dates are
available on the forged document venue may be miles apart. There are three different
hand writings means three different persons using these papers. Ironically all are using the
same ballpoint pen even before it was invented.

Enlarge the images with some good image editor change the contrast brightness you will

2.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

find out that the document was forged then a black/white photocopy was made out of the
forged on and there after scanned. If one ever gets to see the original forgery it will not be
difficult to note down the quality of the ball pen how it missing the gell deposit at every
rollover of certain alphabet.
Bashkar, 8/20/2005 10:07 AM
There is some controversy on the authenticity of the document. It was not submitted to the
UN until the 90's, being reported as missing. How come? Some analists even say that the
Maharaja wasn't even in office at the day it was supposedly signed. How did that happen?
I'm not taking sides, by any mean, since my comprehension on the subject is very limited.
Dani These are just some questions I'd like to see answered.
Dani 8/20/2005 10:33 AM
Can you substantiate any of what you say?

Bhaskar
8/20/2005 10:51 AM
"Alastair Lamb (in his book, Kashmir - A disputed legacy 1846-1990)points out that the
Instrument of Accession could not have been signed by the Mahrajah on 26th October as
he was travelling by road to Jammu (a distance of over 350 Km). There is no evidence to
suggest that a meeting or communication of any kind took place on 26th October 1947. In
fact it was on 27th October 1947 that the Mahrajah was informed by his MC Mahajan and
VP Menon (who had flown into Srinagar), the the Instrument of Accession had already
been negotiated in Dehli. The Mahrajah did not in fact sign the Instrument of Accession, if
at all, until 27th October 1947."

"Finally, there is some doubt as to whether the treaty was ever signed. International law
Dani clearly states that every treaty entered into by a member of the United Nations must be
registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations.27 The Instrument of Accession was
neither presented to the United Nations nor to Pakistan. While this does not void the treaty,
it does mean that India cannot invoke the treaty before any organ of the United Nations.28
Moreover, further shedding doubt on the treaty’s validity, in 1995 Indian authorities claimed
that the original copy of the treaty was either stolen or lost." Vikas Kapur and Vipin Narang
/ Stanford Journal of IR.
Dani 8/20/2005 11:04 AM
1. Alastair Lamb has written a book based on conjecture. The dates that he provides or the
setting that he describes as the situation is not borne out by any reference that can be
corroborated. This has been discussed threadbare in another community.
Bhaskar Writers have the ability to mix and sell a book based on half truths and that is what he has
done.
8/20/2005 11:16 AM
"Finally, there is some doubt as to whether the treaty was ever signed. International law
clearly states that every treaty entered into by a member of the United Nations must be
registered with the Secretariat of the United Nations.27 The Instrument of Accession was
neither presented to the United Nations nor to Pakistan. While this does not void the treaty,
it does mean that India cannot invoke the treaty before any organ of the United Nations.28
Moreover, further shedding doubt on the treaty’s validity, in 1995 Indian authorities claimed
that the original copy of the treaty was either stolen or lost." Vikas Kapur and Vipin Narang
/ Stanford Journal of IR.

1. You put up a quote from yet another book without questioning it.

2.In January 1957, when the Indian representative gave a seven hour marathon lecture to
the UN on the Kashmir issue, several documents were given to the UN as annexures to
Bhaskar the speech and there was specific reference to the Instrument of Annexure by Krishna
Menon in that speech. I have already provided the entire transcript of that speech by way
of a link in this community.

3. The Instrument of Accession was a standard document that both India and Pakistan
used to sign up 565 Princely States into the Union. This was approved by the British and
the British had notified the Princes about the fact that they would have to either
India/Pakistan.

4. This was an irrevocable Instrument of Accession and not a 'treaty' between member
sovereign states of the world community, let alone of the UN. Most of the princely states

2.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

automatically merged with India/Pakistan on the day the 2 countries got their
independence but for a few which took some time. So the registeration part does not apply.

5. Pakistan has no locus standi between the agreement between 2 sovereign states, so
there is no reason to share anything with Pakistan on the subject.

6. I have already mentioned that reference to the Instrument of Accession was made as
late as 1957 at the UN. contd...
Dani 8/20/2005 11:32 AM
6. The issue was taken by India to the UN in Jan 1948 only to highlight the fact that a
Pakistani invasion had taken place on a State which had formally acceded to India. The
reason for approaching the UN was to set out the sequence of events and get them to
persuade Pakistan to withdraw its people from a State which was India's legally.

7. The Instrument of Accession that Kashmir signed with India was never ever questioned
by Pakistan in the UN nor was the authority of the Maharaja of Kashmir ever called into
question.

8. The signatories of the IoA were the Maharaja of Kashmir who died in 1961 and Lord
Mountbatten, as India's first Governor General who died in 1979. Lord Mounbatten was
asked by free India to continue as Governor General after India got its independence from
the UK. So the British government too were completely in the loop on this.

9. A document is produced by a country in front of any legal/world body only when required
and the Instrument of Accession was never called into question by the UN.

Bhaskar 10. India's position on Kashmir is very clear and it has been so from day one. It has
absolute and unquestionable legal right over Kashmir. Since the situation involved an
occupation of Kashmir by Pakistan before the Instrument of Accession was signed, the UN
suggested a plebiscite there which India agreed to, provided that all of Pakistani people
and army were withdrawn from the area so that the free will of the Kashmiri people could
be exercised. The UN accordingly passed resolutions in 1948 itself and later, which
Pakistan refused to abide by, in the meanwhile indulging in forceful resettling of people in
the region from outside. Thus no plebiscite was ever held.

11. Since the ground reality of Kashmir based on extensive resettlement and bifurcation of
the area by PAkistan, had undergone a change, India and Pakistan realised that it was
futile involving the UN anymore. They signed the 1972 Simla Agreement that the matter
henceforth would be sorted out bilaterally.

contd.

Lastly 8/20/2005 11:40 AM
All the Instrument of Accession agreements signed by India with the other 550 Princely
States too form part of the confidential set of official documents.
So it is only recently that India decided to put up a scan on its govt website of the Kashmir
Instrument of Accession.

Not surprisingly this has in one stroke demolished the conspiracy theory floated around by
some authors of books that the document did not exist simply because they were not
granted access to it.

Bhaskar The point which needs to be remebered time and again that Pakistan, India, Britain (
through Lord Mountbatten) as well as the Maharaja and his son, who is still alive, as well as
India know about the Instrument of Accession and the illegality of Pakistan's presence in
Kashmir.

The question to be asked then and now is what is Pakistan doing in Kashmir
occupying a part of it, when they don't have a shred of a legal claim on it?
I see... Thanks for clearing that up... 8/20/2005 12:46 PM
Well, even though they have no legal right to claim the territory they might have a legitimate
reason to do so (I'm not saying they actually do, just that they may). We all know that
International Law has fragile limitations and must not be considered absolute. The control
of the Kashmir region is a matter of great geopolitical importance for Pakistan although
most claims are made in favor of the religious and demograpgic dispute. Isn't it legitimate to
Dani seek autarcy?

2.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Dani 8/20/2005 1:15 PM
Kashmir has been used by Pakistan to whip up religious passion within Pakistan for political
purposes and this often goes side by side with strong anti-Hindu anti-India hate campaigns.
Politicians who indulge in this are traditionally favored by the masses when it comes to
power. That is the strong reason for the Mullah-Army nexus in Pakistan. All this pre-dates
Afghanisan and even the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

Pakistan thus converted itself as a country formed as a 'Muslim majority area' during
independence, through ethnic cleansing into a 97.5% Muslim ruled area. They beleieve that
Pakistan now is only for Muslims and have propagated terrorism in Kashmir since 1988 to
arouse the civilian population there through acts of terrorism - terrorism carried out by
Pakistan deliberately targeting Hindus, so much so that more than 300,000 Hindus,
indigenous Kashmiris, fled Kashmir abandoning their property in 1990 and are now settled
Bhaskar in refugee camps outside Delhi.
Thus while Pakistan believes that it is a country only for Muslims, India believes it is a
country for all religions. It is a secular country. The majority of Muslims in modern India
realised the political game that the Muslim League that created Pakistan was playing, and
opted to stay back in India.

India thus has states with Hindu majority, Muslim majority, Chrisitan majority and even
communist majority. So India obviously doesn't buy any argument on the basis of religion.
North Ireland, Palestine and Pakistan were bad enough precedents set up by the British
under the assumption that multi-religious cultures cannot co-exist. That mistake cannot be
further compounded.
8/20/2005 1:40 PM
The control of the Kashmir region is a matter of great geopolitical importance for Pakistan

Every part of every country is geopolitically important particularly when it neighbours
several countries.
Kashmir in this case neighbours Pakistan, Afghanistan and China.
Pakistan occupying a territory through invasion doesn't provide legitamcy to its occupation
or to its claim as a result of such occupation particularly under a situation when another
country has indisputable legal claim over that area.
That is the reason India doesn't consider the Kashmir matter to be a 'dispute', as the title of
India over Kashmir is clear cut. Pakistan at all times like to tag on the word 'dispute' so that
they can provide a semblance of legitamacy to their occupation there.

Since 1947, India has held multi party elections in Kashmir, several times, with Kashmiris
exercising their free choice of vote to elect their own representatives for local governance
as well as for representation in the Indian Parliament just as the people of other states of
India do.
Kashmir also has a separate constitution drafted and approved by the Kashmir legislative
Bhaskar assembly in the mid-1950s, which further ratifies the fact that Kashmir is irrevocably
acceded to India.

Thus through democratic representation the voice, feelings and the will of the people of
Kashmir is being exercised by India for more than 50 years now.

Pakistan on the other hand, split Kashmir into 2 halves, one administered largely by the
Army and a very small geographical piece which was called 'autonomous'. It also granted
China a part of Kashmir in 1964.

Given that Pakistan itself has a poor track record of democracy let alone elections, the
situation is worse so in Pakistan occupied Kashmir where the people do not enjoy the same
rights as the people of the 4 Pakistani provinces.
Literacy levels and other social indicators in Pak occupied Kashmir are lower than the
country avg.
Such is the situation.
8/20/2005 9:04 PM
UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL E/CN.4/1999/SR.6 8 October 1999 ENGLISH Original: FRENCH
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Fifty-fifth session SUMMARY RECORD OF THE 6th
MEETING Held at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, on Friday, 26 March 1999, at 10 a.m.
Chairperson: Ms. ANDERSON (Ireland) page 8
Syed
37. Kashmir had been occupied by India since 27 October 1947, although it had never

2.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

formed part of that country. It would be interesting to know how the Indian authorities
justified what they called the integration of the State of Jammu and Kashmir into India; they
created the impression that the transfer of the sovereignty of the State of Jammu and
Kashmir had taken the form of a treaty known as an instrument of accession. But that
instrument had never been produced; did it really exist? On that point, the International
Court of Justice had adopted a very clear position, holding that the integration of territory
into a State could not take place without ascertaining the freely expressed will of the
people. In its resolutions on Kashmir, the Security Council had stated that the final
disposition of the State had to be through an impartial plebiscite organized under United
Nations auspices. While presenting itself as “the biggest democracy”, India was trampling
on human rights to satisfy its expansionist aims.

India’s official representative present in the meeting did not refute or object.
8/20/2005 9:07 PM
UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL E/CN.4/2005/NGO/203 28 February 2005 ENGLISH ONLY
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Sixty-first session Item 5 of the provisional agenda
THE RIGHT OF PEOPLES TO SELF-DETERMINATION AND ITS APPLICATION TO
PEOPLES UNDER COLONIAL OR ALIEN DOMINATION OR FOREIGN OCCUPATION
Written statement* submitted by Jammu and Kashmir Council for Human Rights (JKCHR),
a non-governmental organization in special consultative status The Secretary-General has
received the following written statement which is circulated in accordance with Economic
and Social Council resolution 1996/31. [11 February 2005]

It is a pity that when India and Pakistan emerged as two sovereign states in exercise of a
Right to Self Determination in August 1947, the People of Jammu and Kashmir who were
one people up until 27 October 1947, as a result of a Tribal invasion became a people
divided under three administrations. The 70 year old (1877-1947) Rights Movement lost its
Syed course and an independent State lapsed into the respective controls of India and Pakistan.
Under the Instrument of Accession (disputed by the people) India accrued an obligation to
protect the ‘life’, ‘property’ and ‘honour’ of the people of Jammu and Kashmir. This
obligation extended to all the people living under the three administrations on either side of
the Line Of Control. In early 1947 the political environment in India and Pakistan was
bedevilled by a communal bias and mistrust. Due to a paucity of information, lack of
interaction and communication people did not have the ability to make a ‘mature judgement’
and an ‘informed choice’. Hindu religious sentiment was pitched and poised against the
Muslim sentiment and vice versa. Indian Governments erred to rule Kashmir through a
mechanism of proxy-politics. It enraged the Muslim sentiment and Pakistan stepped in to
advantage itself from the Muslim sentiment.
8/20/2005 9:47 PM
http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/APCITY/UNPAN016754.pdf

I can give you more, may be in thousands like the above link.

The above link is for “Consolidated Fund of Goa - Capital Account Disbursements (India).”
Isn’t it funny that an insignificant document like the above is searchable on the UN record
and at the same time isn’t it treacherous and a conspiracy that a document which can
Syed change the lives of millions of people of Kashmir is inaccessible?

What Indian government has displayed on its official website is a fraud and forged
document.
8/20/2005 9:48 PM
UNITED NATIONS E Economic and Social Council

Since when did the UN Economic and Social Council start commenting on such matters,
eh?
Particularly when the UNSC was handling the matter at that time in the 1940s-50s?

The Indian representative did not comment on the matter becuase the said council had no
business to comment let alone act on that matter. And that after Pakistan had clearly
Bhaskar agreed with India way back in 1972 that the matter was to be handled bilaterally.

Syed, you just get increasingly stupid by the day. I gave you a link of the Indian
representative's speech to the UN in Jan 1957 where all such matters are discussed with
the UNSC including the IoA.
You refused to read it or acknowledge it in your patently dishonest style.

2.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

You refuse to accept that your country has never questioned the IoA ever in the UNSC and
you who has basic problems in understanding a one sentence legal clause in the document
want to call it a fraud?
You are more of an idiot than I had imagined.
8/20/2005 10:25 PM
Bhasker as stupid a person as I am fail to understand that submissions at the economic
and social council placed by the NGO’s are circulated to the members - to the extent that
what India spent in Goa is the part of UN record; what India submitted as an official record,
the so called instrument of accession, was never circulated?

Syed Why UN chose to brush aside the submission of the Indian government on a matter termed
a nuclear flashpoint? Is it the credibility of the Indian documents?
8/20/2005 10:50 PM
Does the UN take your instrument of accession as fraud? If at all something emerges from
the UN graveyard now, stupid people like me will be justified in thinking that it is some kind
of magic by a crook out of the strong international fraudulent Indian lobby.

Syed

Syed 8/20/2005 11:05 PM
You are not only dumb but stupid too as I have repeatedly pointed out.

1. What India spent in Goa did not come out of the UNSC records definitely, but from
another arm of the UN. It came out of a context where the said document itself was part of
the basic submission for circulation and not an annexure.

2. I have explained India's postion clearly on numerous occasions in this forum. I'll also
reiterate the fact which I repeatedly mentioned that a whole host of documents were
submitted to the UN as part of an annexure to the speech made by India's representative to
the UN in Jan 1957. These documents included everything that Krishna Menon gave
reference to his speech.
Bhaskar If you had but read the link that I gave you, instead of trolling around here with your replies,
you would realise that Krishna Menon as well as the UNSC council members remarked on
the voluminous submissions made by India along with the case. The contents of the
speech itself were circulated and not the annexures which became UN records available
for examination if and when specifically required by the UNSC.

3. Either you are dishonest which you are well likely to be, or you are absolutely ignorant of
how these things work, which is also very likely. In either case, your inferences and
insinuations are just the crazed ravings of an ignoramus idiot.
8/20/2005 11:13 PM
Does the UN take your instrument of accession as fraud?

Having said all that, the UN never itself calls into question any document submitted by a
member nation. Neither did they find cause to remark on it, nor did Pakistan, an interested
party in the whole affair and which was making a case against India to justify its aggression
in Kashmir, find it necessary to bring the document into question or remark on its
authenticity in the UN.

When your own Paki government has recognised the truth of the matter in this regard, why
Bhaskar are you raving like a crazed idiot and questioning it?
The only answer to this, is that you have as much credibility as the next Paki imbecile
around you. Your only salvation is to keep feeding yourself on more lies and hate. Such
food will help keep you in a state of psychosis that you deserve. And yes. Go read some
more conspiracy sites in the meanwhile which mix half truths and outright lies to cocncoct
stories. That is all that you and your like are fit for.
8/20/2005 11:40 PM
To display the expenditure in Goa the UN has several arms for the so-called instrument of
accession the UN is armless? How pityfull?

What has not been objected or not said by Pakistani representative does not matter what
has been put on record for all to see is important? Has it ever been argued by a majority
and accepted by a Pakistani at the UN that the Kashmir is a settled issue on the basis of
Syed the instrument of accession?

2.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

What ever names you like you may call me, that is your state of mind. Universally Kashmir
is taken as a dispute and flashpoint historically the IoA is a fraudulent tactic.
8/20/2005 11:50 PM
What has not been objected or not said by Pakistani representative does not matter

Of course it matters. When the legal accession of Kashmir to India is not questioned
by Pakistan, then who are you to question it, eh?

This brings us to the point that Pakistan has been solely appealing to the UN on emotional
grounds, having illegally occupied a part of Kashmir through invasion, to settle the 'dispute'.
And when the UN passed its resolutions ordering Pakistan to vacate from Kashmir so that
a free and plebiscite could be held by the Kashmiris, it refused!

Bhaskar This sums up Pakistan and Pakistani attitude on the subject.
They don't recognise civil law or legal documents, neither do they believe in keeping up
their word to the UN, when it comes to implementation, after agreeing to the terms and
conditions involved in the resolution that was passed!

Pakistan behaves like a lawless criminal society on the world stage, time and again and
this case stands mute testimony to that.
8/22/2005 1:35 AM
i think v r in united nation community
so in solving international problems u must abide by the united nation's resolution or u shud
say that u dont consider united nation as a just 3rd party
in such case bhaskar u shud immediately leave the community
n if u think united nation is good enough u shud solve all probs as per united nations
resolution and as i know united nation wants a referendom in kashmir

pakistan is agreed to it

i dont know y india is not, coz as they say that, all kashmiries r with them n a small group of
Mutawassa pakistani millitant is causing probs there than they shud hold referendom there n shut up all
m critics

wat u say bhaskar ?
8/26/2005 4:35 AM
I notice that there is not much activity and interest of people in the topic “Kashmir -
Instrument of Accession!”. I like to sum up the whole thing and for the benefit of the
readers have copied below the parts of different resolutions and the complete list of
resolutions on India and Pakistan.

There is no mention of the instrument of accession any where on the UN record, to the
extent, there is no mention of the word “accession” any where in any of the UN
resolutions. As Bhasker mention the instrument was allegedly signed on October 26 47
while India and Pakistan as per resolution 126 and as late as 1957 accept and recognize
the UN resolution 38 of 17 January 1948.

All the resolutions after 126 pertain to actions of the UN after wars of 1965 and 1971
Syed between India and Pakistan. There is even mention in resolution 122 of 24 January 1957 in
very explicit term that the actions taken and will be taken in future by All Jammu & Kashmir
National Conference are not acceptable to the UN. up till now as per UN record the
Kashmir is a disputed territory.

Hence the scanned copy of the instrument of accession on an Indian government website
is a fraud and has no legal bearing and not recognized by the United Nations.
8/26/2005 4:36 AM
91 (1951) Resolution of 30 March 1951

Observing that the Governments of India and Pakistan have accepted the provisions of the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August 1948 and 5
January 1949 and of the Security Council resolution of 14 March 1950, and have re-
affirmed their desire that the future of the State of Jammu and Kashmir shall be decided
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the
Syed auspices of the United Nations;

2.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Observing that on 27 October 1950 the General Council of the “All Jammu and Kashmir
National Conference” adopted a resolution recommending the convening of a Constituent
Assembly for the purpose of determining the “future shape and affiliations of the State of
Jammu and Kashmir”; observing further from statements of responsible authorities that
action is proposed to convene such a Constituent Assembly and that the area from which
such a Constituent Assembly would be elected is only a part of the whole territory of
Jammu and Kashmir;

Reminding the Governments and Authorities concerned of the principle embodied in the
Security Council resolutions of 21 April 1948, 3 June 1948 and 14 March 1950 and the
United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan resolutions of 13 August 1948 and 5
January 1949, that the final disposition of the State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in
accordance with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free
and impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations;

Affirming that the convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General
Council of the “All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference,” and any action that
Assembly might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire
State or any part thereof would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with
the above principle;
8/26/2005 4:37 AM
Declaring its belief that it is the duty of the Security Council in carrying out its primary
responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security to aid the parties to
reach an amicable solution of the Kashmir dispute and that a prompt settlement of this
dispute is of vital importance to the maintenance of international peace and security;

122 (1957) Resolution of 24 January 1957

Having heard statements from representatives of the Governments of India and Pakistan
concerning the dispute over the State of Jammu and Kashmir,

Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
Syed with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial
plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,

1. Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of
the ‘All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may
have taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the
entire State or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such
action by the Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with
the above principles;
8/26/2005 4:38 AM
126 (1957) Resolution of 2 December 1957

Observing further that the governments of India and Pakistan recognize and accept
the provisions of its resolution 38 (1948) of 17 January 1948 and of the resolutions of
the united nations commission on India and Pakistan dated 13 August 1948 and 5 January
1948 which envisage in accordance with their terms the determination of the future status
of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in accordance with the will of the people through the
democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite, and that mar. Jarring felt it
appropriate to explore what was impeding their full implementation,

38 (1948) Resolution of 17 January 1948
39 (1948) Resolution of 20 January 1948
Syed 47 (1948) Resolution of 21 April 1948
51 (1948) Resolution of 3 June 1948
80 (1950) Resolution of 14 March 1950
91 (1951) Resolution of 30 March 1951
96 (1951) Resolution of 10 November 1951
98 (1952) Resolution of 23 December 1952
122 (1957) Resolution of 24 January 1957

2.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

123 (1957) Resolution of 21 February 1957
126 (1957) Resolution of 2 December 1957
209 (1965) Resolution of 4 September 1965
210 (1965) Resolution of 6 September 1965
211 (1965) Resolution of 20 September 1965
214 (1965) Resolution of 29 September 1965
215 (1965) Resolution of 5 November 1965
303 (1971) Resolution of 06 December 1971
307 (1971) Resolution of 21 December 1971
8/26/2005 5:03 AM
There is no mention of the instrument of accession any where on the UN record, to the
extent, there is no mention of the word “accession” any where in any of the UN resolutions.

Obviously, there will not be any mention in any of the Instrument of Accession in the UN
Resolutions which speak clearly about actions to be taken by both Pakistan and India to
bring about peaceful resolution of the issue.

Bhaskar The Instrument of Accession was never a matter of contention either by Pakistan or by the
UN.

So much for Syed's understanding on why the Kashmir issue went to the UN in the first
place!

8/26/2005 5:10 AM
Hence the scanned copy of the instrument of accession on an Indian government website
is a fraud and has no legal bearing and not recognized by the United Nations.

What sort of logic is that, eh?
Because the UN Resolutions don't speak about the Instrument of Accession, because it
was never a matter of debate or contention by Pakistan, it becomes a fraud. Something
which even the Pakistan GOVERNMENT did not say in front of the UN?

Bhaskar Obviously, the Pakis live in denial and everything presented by way of evidence is a fraud
when it just doesn't suit them.

Calling something a fraud when it stares you in the face from the official website of India
doesn't wash.
You guys obviously don't have an argument.
8/26/2005 5:29 AM
Yeah, good. You've now copy-pasted a few UN Resolutions and provided a list of various
Resolutions passed on the subject.

All of which don't matter, because Pakistan refused to comply by not vacating its people
from the area of Kashmir occupied by it, so that a free and fair plebiscite could be held.

As long as Pakistan occupied Kashmir, even the UN were clear that a plebiscite
could not be held.

Eventually it was clear that with the lapse of more than a decade, Pakistan had materially
changed the demographic representation of the people in that area by systematic and
planned settlement of non-Kashmiris.

Given the fact that the ground reality is now irreparably changed all you Pakis can
Bhaskar forget about a plebiscite that you were scared to allow the UN to conduct even in 1948!

Pakistan is bound to follow the Simla Agreement which states that all matters
relating to Kashmir will be resolved bilaterally. So stop whining. You can't change
anything.

In the meanwhile let history know, recordand remember that The Instrument of
Accession exists, legally valid and binding that makes Kashmir forever and inseparably
a part of India.

Let all the Paki hearts burn with this knowledge that have wrongly, illegally and brutally
occupied Kashmir, as any rogue nation which is what Pakistan all about anyway.

2.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Is there any othe reason why Pakistan should be sponsoring, abetting and carryinfg
out terrorist activities since 1988 otherwise?

A country which is legally above board will never resort to use of the gun, which is
what Pakistan did in 1948 and since 1988 todate.
8/26/2005 5:46 AM
You finally agree that Kashmir is an issue.

Syed
8/26/2005 5:55 AM
You finally agree that Kashmir is an issue.

Of course it is an Issue / Problem, because PAKISTAN illegally occupies Kashmir when it
has no business to be there.
Bhaskar
That is the reason India went to the UN, to get Pakistan out of Kashmir
8/26/2005 6:21 AM
Good Kashmir is an issue and that is why India went to UN, and forgot to record the
instrument of accession on that body and agreed that UN has to hold Plebiscite to
determine the will of the Kashmir people.

Syed It is fine with me. Please do the needful.
Syed 8/26/2005 8:19 AM
I've told you this before.
You don't understand law or anything to do with legalities.
Go and check with a lawyer, to first 'understand' why India went to the UN?

The question was never about India's possession of Kashmir but about the fact that
Pakistan needed to move out of Kashmir, having occupied Kashmir illegally.

The UN understood India's positiona nd its reasons for coming to them. It also understood
that understood that Pakistan was adamant about the land it had illegally invaded and
occupied.
The UN in its infinite wisdom instead of taking a stand on the issue, decided to soft pedal
Bhaskar the matter by suggesting a plebiscite, based on certain conditions of performance.
India agreed to it, but Pakistan having agreed to it didn't comply with the provisions
involved in the resolutions about vacating Kashmir territory.
This is the story.

You know it. Yet you are intellectually dishonest about this and intentionally behave like a
moron. Both of which suggest you live in denial and refuse to accept responsibility for a
situation totally created by you. Created then in 1947-48 and since 1988 onwards through
active promotion of terrorism.
You guys are sick and worthy of all the contempt.
8/26/2005 9:27 PM
Bhasker please stick to the topic I quote your lines form the very first post of yours

“Do not post on this thread unless you have anything meaningful and relevant to
say about the Instrument of Accession. That is the topic here.”
Syed
Syed 8/26/2005 9:50 PM
Really? I've noticed that you've been rambling about UN resolutions quite a bit whenever
you get the opportunity to post anything related to Kashmir.

Bhaskar I also see the Instrument of Accession really hurts the likes of you, people who have lived a
lie all their lives and who believe in propagating it.
8/26/2005 10:05 PM
The above post of your does not make the Instrument of accession displayed on the Indian
government web site, any credible. Please bring some thing meaningful and relevant.

2.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Syed
8/26/2005 10:26 PM
Just because you are blinded by shame, prejudice, ignorance, dishonesty, denial and bias
doesn't mean that a legal document is not credible.

Bhaskar Looks like you've nothing to contribute here, so quit trolling.

8/26/2005 10:42 PM
Good! Above is the meaningful and relevant stuff you can come up with. If I quit you will
be left alone here who else has taken interest in your topic. Me! I am here to expose you
and your government.

Syed
8/27/2005 2:26 AM
I am here to expose you and your government

You're a moron just shamelessly exposing yourself through your idiocy. You've said all that
you ever wanted to say long back and are just calling everything that you say as fake and
Bhaskar fraud in bold letters.
Burn, burn inside, thinking about the Instrument of Accession.
8/27/2005 7:56 AM
I can’t come down to your state but wait till you have some decent and logical thing worth a
reply.

Syed
8/27/2005 8:10 AM
Guys like you only troll when you have nothing to say...quit being a nuisance now.

Bhaskar
Kashmir - Instrument of Accession ! 9/10/2005 5:45 PM
There are lot other things going on in this world not only Kashir .. is the problem ..

Mirza
9/10/2005 10:38 PM
Sure, but the above topic was raised for the discussion on instrument of accession and I
had to respond to what I thought was irrelevant.

Syed
the solution ... 9/13/2005 3:58 AM
make Kashmir a separate country.give the land to its people.free from india.free from
pakistan.n militants,thts kashmir the countrys problem.india and pakistan dont have to butt
in.i say kashmire an independent nation.the un i think will intervene n do just this.i feel i
should.

Nishanth
why acession instrument was farce? 9/14/2005 10:36 PM
1. Indian forces had landed on srinagar airport before accession instrument was signed.

2. Maharaja hari singh wanted indepedant kashmir and he was pressurised to sign
accession instrument.as later he was removed from power soon.

Liaquat 3. kashmir which is dominantly muslim state by partition scheme was part of pakistan, as
all muslim majority areas would join pakistan.

2.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

9/15/2005 5:12 AM
liaquat,
"Do not post on this thread unless you have anything meaningful and relevant to say
about the Instrument of Accession. That is the topic here".
Krishna
9/15/2005 8:01 AM
this is wat United Natiuon has latest abt kashmir 9/15/2005 7:57 AM
Re: To Give the Citizens of Kashmir the Freedom to Choose their Nationality

Submitted to: Economic and Social Committee

Submitted by: Pakistan

Date: October 28, 2002

Establishing in the PREAMBLE the principles that apply in the resolution:

Taking into account the rising tensions in the region of Kashmir, and

Fully aware that the mounting violence could possibly lead to a larger conflict, and

Concerned that India will continue to rule Kashmir without the consent of the Muslim
majority in the region.

Be It Hereby Resolved That The General Assembly:

1. Calls Upon the United Nations to set up and monitor referendum elections to allow the
people of Kashmir to choose their destiny.

2. Asks India to support the United Nations in establishing a safe electoral process.

3. Expresses Pakistan’s hope that this will lead to a peaceful solution to the conflict in
Kashmir.

so y india dont abide by the intrenational law

this is wat other countries say abt kashmir
http://www.dalitstan.org/journal/rights/102/210391.html
Mutawassa
m carefully read caluse 2

2. The United States urges the Government of India to re-open Kashmir to the media, to
human rights organizations, and to the International Red Cross and other relief groups;

just tell me if u say that there is nothing wrong in there than y india dont want media to go
in kashmir ?

wat r u afraid of ?

i know u wud again tell me abt elections in kashmir but man united nation ask referendom
under its own ordor not under indian rule

n lastly as u say that kashmir is not a disputed area

man while u ask me to come out of my syellabus u dont seems to read ur own syellubs
books

read it carefully

Whereas the United Nations recognized the Kashmiri People's right to self-determination in
1949;

Whereas the governments of India , Pakistan and the United States were parties to this
action;

2.20
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

delete

1949 9/15/2005 8:20 AM
http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/kashun80.htm

Mutawassa
m
9/15/2005 11:14 PM
dear mutawassam,
i hope, u follow news papers regularly.if don't plz serach internet one more time for the
news item "pakistani jounalists visiting kashmir" recently. and for the complete reply to ur
multipleposted post, see "who won 1965 war".
Krishna
9/16/2005 6:40 AM
yes i know recent developement on the part of india but y u closed it ?

Mutawassa
m
9/17/2005 7:36 PM
Professor Alastair Lamb in his book has totally demolished India's case regarding the
Kashmir issue. His conclusions regarding the Kashmir case were carried out in a
monograph titled The Indian claim to Jammu and Kashmir: a reappraisal, which was
released to the press in London on February 20, 1993.

In this document the author proclaimed, "the ruler of the princely State of Jammu and
Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh, never did sign the Instrument of Accession to India. And to
date no satisfactory original Instrument, signed by Maharaja, has been produced, though a
highly suspect version, complete with false date of October 26, 1947, has been in
circulation since 1960.

Prof. Lamb's monograph, based on research and irrefutable evidence from the available
archives, has brought to light for the first time India's fraudulently obtained accession of
Qaiser Jammu and Kashmir. It lays bare over five decades of Indian falsehood on Jammu and
Kashmir and has altered fundamentally the nature of the Indian intervention in Jammu and
Kashmir on October 27, 1947.

The author asserts that, "India was not defending its own but intervening in a foreign state."
The monograph stresses, had the United Nations and the world at large been aware of the
falsification of the record by Indians, they would have listened with less sympathy to
arguments made by successive Indian representatives." Given the facts as they are known,
Prof. Lamb holds, "it may well be that an impartial international tribunal would decide that
India had no right at all to be in the State of Jammu and Kashmir."
9/17/2005 7:47 PM
The fact that till the writing of these lines, India has not contradicted the reports of the
missing of the Accession Document is not surprising because it is of, no use even if it
existed at any point of time. As pointed out by Alistair Lamb, India has been circulating a
fake document, calling it Instrument of Accession. Therefore, it is not important whether
such a piece of paper is missing or not. What is vital is that India yields to the verdict of the
United Nations and leaves Kashmiris alone to decide their political future, through UN-
Qaiser supervised plebiscite.

These are excerpts from article by Ayaz Daudzai titled: ‘Kashmir-historic facts can't be
altered’

2.21
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

As ever the two protagonists to this dispute maintain their part of the story to be true. Out
here we are not trying bridge any chasms, we post facts we believe to be true or accurate.
Hyderabad & Junagadh 9/17/2005 7:54 PM
Can anyone more versed on the partition of India 1947 kindly tell us how were the princely
states of Hyderabad and Junagadh annexed by India. I believe they were annexed by
force.
Qaiser
Qaiser 9/17/2005 9:47 PM
Alastair Lamb wrote a book filled with conjectures and half-truths, none of which he could
support.
His book has been bare, for what it is, a piece of fiction.
So get yourself an education on that.

Bhaskar You speak of Junagadh. Do you even know what happened there and the day by day
sequence of events?
And you go by what your Paki textbooks have taught you on the subject?
9/18/2005 12:05 AM
Alistir Lamb is relevent here. What you dispel as fiction is convincing evidence. Its not a
machination of a Pakistani.

If I knew about Junagadh I would not be asking the question(?). Lets have your answer.
Qaiser
9/18/2005 12:50 AM
hay bhaskar
even document is true in actual it is not been accepted by world community as united
nations clearly says that kashmir shud b decided on plebixite under UN rule
y u discuss this documenat while ur own Govt was a party to the united nation's resolution
which clearly depicts that kashmir is a disputed area n plebicite is the only solution
y u dont abide by united nation ?
dont u believe in united nation to b just?

Mutawassa
m
Qaiser 9/18/2005 3:07 AM
Read the previous discussions on the subject.
I'm not going to repeat everything ad nauseum for every Paki who appears on this
community.
Bhaskar

Muta 9/18/2005 3:09 AM
I don't read your stupid posts, so don't bother addressing me.

Bhaskar
9/18/2005 3:27 AM
yes pigeons do when see cat they do close their eyes
u dont read ma post coz u cant answer them

Mutawassa
m
Bhask! 9/18/2005 7:57 AM
I read your entire post. It had volumes of nothing in it. By making such longish posts you
hardly prove any point,as its about the same thing repeated over and over. They say
'brevity is the soul of wit'. Posts should be short, crisp and to the point.
Qaiser

2.22
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Qaiser 9/18/2005 8:03 AM
Some people make long posts because they can and have something to say.
Sometimes that needs to get repeated in different forms when the discussion opposition
consists of a bunch of morons.

Bhaskar Now did you really have something to say on the topic or have you come around as just
another Paki troll?
Bhaskar 9/18/2005 5:48 PM
All u wrote was the same thing over and over again and ofourse your costumry
condescending manner of calling those postees who dont say 'Bhaskar Touche' as idiots,
morons and from the 16% category of mad Pakis. Right? You made your point for a non
Muslims audience and probaly some, if not all might have said, 'Bhaskar you are the
saviour of India.' They can say what they feel like but we the Muslims stand staunch in our
Qaiser belief that the said instrument was a fake as it does not meet the desired legal standards of
'beyond reasonable doubt.'

2.23
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=709633&tid=2441755035240645237&na=3&nst=-
2&nid=709633-2441755035240645237-2443978694430529808

IPFC SNOBS

Topic: East Pakistan:The end game

East Pakistan:The end game 1/12/2006 12:53 AM
Finally some one has the balls to speak up openly. Unfortunately its too late.

This should be a lesson for those who are conducting operations in Balochistan and NWFP
for similar reasons.

Here is a snapshopt from the book.

Siddiqi also exposes the infamous General Niazi who shamelessly defended the
rapists by declaring that: “You cannot expect a man to live, fight and die in East
Pakistan and go to Jhelum for sex, would you?”

You can buy the book from Dukandar
1/12/2006 9:35 PM
@junaid

as early as 1969, Tariq Ali criticized the army rule in Pakistan in his book “Pakistan: Military
rule or People’s power” [I’ve yet to read it] and became a bitter critic of its actions in East
Pakistan in 1971.
Sandy
Around the mid 1990s, I read his other book “Can Pakistan Survive? The Death of a
State”, which was supposedly an ‘expansion’ of the previously mentioned one. Now I don’t
remember most of what I read, but I sure was surprised by the author’s criticism of the
Pakistan govt. and army on the East Pakistan question.
Pakistan resources must be defended 1/12/2006 10:23 PM
The Pakistani military's "alleged" misconduct in 1971 does not, in any way, mean that the
Pakistani military is carrying out atrocities in Baluchistan. This is faulty logic.

Recently, Asma Jehangir, the representative of the Human Rights Commission of
Pakistan, was in Baluchistan to assess the situation first hand. She reported counter
claims from both the Bugtis and the military.
Aqdas
Baluchistan has vast energy resources (natural gas and possibly oil)that must be protected
and secured at all cost. These resources belong to the Pakistani people. The Pakistani
military apparently is working on behalf of the Pakistani people.

These natural resources do not belong to any tribe, Baluch or otherwise.
1/13/2006 1:49 AM
The Pakistani military's "alleged" misconduct in 1971 does not

please explain the extra effort made by putting those double qoutes around the word
alleged.
1/13/2006 1:51 AM
This is faulty logic.

you are right. i didnt mean to infer that because pakistan army commited murders in
bengladesh thats why it is also commiting murders in balochistan.

i only meant to emphasize that those who dont learn their history are condemned to repeat
it.
1/13/2006 1:52 AM
Recently, Asma Jehangir, the representative of the Human Rights Commission of
Pakistan, was in Baluchistan to assess the situation first hand. She reported counter

3.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

claims from both the Bugtis and the military.

umm please provide the proof. i read in dawn.com that her caravan was fired upon by
"unknown" miscreants. please note the extra effort made by me this time to put the quotes
around the word unknown.
1/13/2006 1:55 AM
Baluchistan has vast energy resources (natural gas and possibly oil)that must be protected
and secured at all cost.

bengaldesh used to produce "patsan" that is jute and all of the revenue earned by gov of
pakistan used to be spent building the pakistani capital while bengalis were starving.

protected and secured against whom? against your own people? thats why it is a famous
saying in pakistan that pakistan army conquers pakistan every ten years. may be they
cannot digest the fact that they still have not been able to annex kashmir to pakistan from
the "clutches" of the indian state.
1/13/2006 1:57 AM
The Pakistani military apparently is working on behalf of the Pakistani people.

CORRECTION: it is working on behalf of the handful of aristrocratic families which consists
of generals, chaudries of punjab , secretaries of islamabad and ministers.

These natural resources do not belong to any tribe, Baluch or otherwise.

yes they dont belong to any one whether a general or a baloch. and the revenue earned
from it should go to the development of pakistan. not in the pockets of the corrupt bastards
who control pakistan.
1/13/2006 2:02 AM
Rashed Rahman, the Executive Editor of The Post, wrote a comprehensive 6-part series
on Balochistan as he knows Balochistan inside out. Here are the links (though he wrote it
very cautiously since its a sensitive issue)

Part I
Part II
Part III
Part IV
Part V
Mehmal Part VI

(PS: I am not prejudiced coz I am a Baloch ... but I do know that what the military is doing
is absolutely wrong!)
@Junaid 1/13/2006 1:00 PM
Sir,

1)The reason I used "double quotes" when refering to the alleged atrocities is that there
has not been any legal proof of these - atleast by a joint Pakistani-Bangladesh
Commission. Unless there is such an effort, we only know the story from one side.
Aqdas
2) Please read Asma's Jehangir's account (and that of other journalists) on the BBC Urdu
website.

3) I shall write some more comments later.

1/13/2006 3:36 PM
Evidence of killings and massacres in Bangladesh have been well documented by a
number of sources.

While the exact figure have been debated even conservative estimates put civilian deaths
into the millions. Its been argued that the number of dead far exceeded those in Rwanda
Rohit and Cambodia.

3.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Particularly brutal were massacres of professors and students at Dhaka University.

Women were particularly prone to assualt.
In her ground-breaking book, Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape, Susan
Brownmiller likened the 1971 events in Bangladesh to the Japanese rapes in Nanjing and
German rapes in Russia during World War II. "... 200,000, 300,000 or possibly 400,000
women (three sets of statistics have been variously quoted) were raped. Eighty percent of
the raped women were Moslems, reflecting the population of Bangladesh, but Hindu and
Christian women were not exempt. ... Hit-and-run rape of large numbers of Bengali women
was brutally simple in terms of logistics as the Pakistani regulars swept through and
occupied the tiny, populous land ..." (p. 81).

Also check out this memoir by a Pakistani army officer. "Siddiqi also exposes the infamous
General Niazi who shamelessly defended the rapists by declaring that: "You cannot expect
a man to live, fight and die in East Pakistan and go to Jhelum for sex, would you?"

The truth of the matter would have been settled if Bangladesh had been allowed to try the
Pakistani officers concerned for war crimes. Unfortunately for them Mrs Gandhi forced
them to give up their PoW's.
1/13/2006 6:28 PM
200,000, 300,000 or possibly 400,000 women

Of all the figures, the ones I'm most skeptical about are the ones for rapes. How many
Pakistani soldiers were there? 90,000 odd no?

This would require basically the whole army contingent to have behaved in the most
lascivious way possible. It is perhaps easier for a non-Pakistani, or Pakistanis not aware of
the way these jawans are trained to believe that might've happened. For me it's hard to
fathom that there were more than a 100 odd bad apples.
Mullah
Mansur Btw what happened to Sarmila Bose's report?
(http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2005\12\18\story_18-12-2005_pg7_40)

There was an additional claim that there were only a 100 odd incidences reported by some
international team called by MajiburRehman to deal with these specific cases. Can't dig up
the details now, but someone might know more.
1/13/2006 9:30 PM
this is something that is as old as conquest itself.

the occupying army rapes the women of the occupied, because military domination is just
a gun away from the psyche that causes a man to rape a woman.

what makes the difference is the degree to which it is tolerated by the military brass, or if it
is even endorsed by them.

it is an acknowledged fact that there have been transgressions against kashmiri women
perpetrated by indian armed forces, and the indian government is apologetic about it,
whether or not any real action is take against the perpetrators in ALL cases or not is
(OMkAr) another issue.

however, if general niazi actually became an apologist for the rapists, that either shows a
plain disregard for women on general niazi's part, or it shows an insidious scheme to
subjugate the bangla psychologically after having done so militarily. this is an abject action
and is thoroughly reprehensible.

rapists will exist as long as there are women; however, that does not mean that one should
condone the action, whatever the circumstance.

3.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Thank You Mansur 1/13/2006 10:25 PM
I think after reading Mansur's link those pseudo-liberals, who jump at any opportunity of
finding a fault with their own military, should, once and for all, cease to argue.

No tin-pot Baluchi war lord, Bugti or otherwise, should be ever allowed to dictate his terms
or to hijack the future of Pakistan.

I support the operation in Baluchistan that is aimed at flushing out miscreants and other
assorted Indian agents.

Aqdas Nontheless, once these miscreants have been flushed out - and thrown in the Arabian sea
- a politial solution needs to be found.

The Pakistani government must, has to, and will, establish its writ in Baluchistan. It will
only negociate at its own terms - like a strong government should.

The Pakistani state and the Pakistani nation is more important than "invented" Baluch
rights.
1/14/2006 12:52 AM
punjabi rights fundamental and
balochi rights invented?

the central government in pakistan has done little to improve the lot of the balochis, pretty
much like the indian government did little to improve the lot of the north eastern states.

no wonder they are both up in arms.

can you stick your neck out and say that a baloch voice carries as much weight in pakistan
as a punjabi voice?
(OMkAr) considering that balochistan is the largest and now, possibly a veritable cash cow, what
has the pakistani government done for them to demand absolute loyalty from the balochis?

i agree that the bugti leaders may be as indifferent to the lot of the common baloch as the
pakistani government, and that the pakistani government should not tolerate them, but has
there been a plan by which the baloch voice can be silenced through negotiations and
offers of investment in development and progress of balochistan in general? or is it going
to be tried and failed formula of military subjugation followed by exploitation?
1/14/2006 1:42 AM
Basically this comes down to nationalism vs provincialism. If you want to go with the
former, you will inadvertently end up favoring the most populous province.

The gov has been undertaking projects in Balochistan actually. But they have always been
sabotaged by the feudals. For example I think they kidnapped and killed the Chinese
Mullah constructors of some coastal road recently no? And the feudal lords even have problems
Mansur with a new port being built in Balochistan! Now what exactly do they want the government
to do? Build a model city on the slopes of some rugged useless mountain range?
1/14/2006 3:50 AM
I found this heart rending report recently:

Pak Army operation in Marri and Bugti area

Warning: I repeat the warning I found from the original piece where I chance to come upon
this news item - the photos are very disturbing and graphic, harden your heart if you want
Prabhu to see them..
1/14/2006 7:09 AM
@aqdas

please try to get your hands on hamood-ur-rehman commission report which has been
hidden away from all of us till now.

3.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

it is the only investigation till now about 1971 and it is by a pakistani senior judge and not a
bengali.

@prabhu

those pics are of american air strikes in afghanistan not balochistan. there was a full
programme about it on Geo TV.
@Friends 1/14/2006 9:02 AM
@junaid
I actually read the HR Commission report in 2001 when it was first released by an Indian
newspaper.

If memory serves me well, there is no mention of "atrocities" in it.

It only deals with w/ the following:
First, it analyses the decision to surrender. It focuses on why was it taken by the Eastern
Command.

Second, it talks at length about what certain officers did (desertion) and what should be
done about it (court martial).

Lastly, it takes account of certain acts of low moral turpitude carried out by the
commanding officers at the front and what that did to the jawans' morale (it makes a
recommendation that Army Mess establishments should be officialy made "dry" (no
alchohol)and religosity should be inculcated (namaaz)in all ranks.

Thus, I really don't know how that report is pertinent here. I think the best account (and
most recent and probably unbiased) is the one provided by Mansur.
Aqdas
@On Rights

I personally think that Baluch rights at this juncture are more a figment of Bugti's
imagination than anything else.

Living within a federation (like PAK) there can be legitimate demands for more rights. For
instance, a bigger share of the National Finance Commission (NFC); more civil service and
military jobs through quota; more developmental projects etc.

However, to claim that certain natural resources that are found in Baluchistan are only for
the Baluchs is not only mean and ludicrous but outright treacherous. By the same logic,
then, all the wheat (atta) made in Punjab should belong to the Punjabis and they should
take up arms to prevent it expropriation.

No one here should underestimate the level at which tribal leaders can stoop to achive
their mean spirited goals. If Bugti is so heart broken for his fellow Baluch why does he not
implement immediate land reform and distribute his thousands of acres (yes, thousands)
among his fellow Baluch? I rest my case.
1/14/2006 9:32 AM
Aqdas

The wheat logic doesn't work well because Punjab sells its wheat to people oustide Punjab
and gets the money for it. What the Balochi's claim that their natural resources are sold
outside and they seem to get no benefits. Fifty years ago using somone else's resources
and not giving them benefits was called colonialism.

Balochistan is very undeveloped compared to Punjab and even Sindh. The resentment is
Rohit natural. The analogy with Bengal is that East Pakistan used to be a major foriegn revenue
for Pakistan but never felt the benefits flowing to it.

I agree the exact numbers of those killed in Bangladesh is unverifiable but a general sense
of the scale comes through, give or take a few thousands. But the fact that you can close

3.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

your eyes and state things like there could hardly have been more than a 100 rapes is just
sad. Discounting the sexual violence the number of civilians disappeared or killed,
particularly at the University is again undeniable. Has Pakistan ever issued an apology?

It is hard to believe that the army commits rapes. Not just driven by lust (as Omkar
explains) but also as a definate part of the plan to subjudgate the population. In South Asia
where community identity is tied up to women's honor, raping a woman is a ultimate insult
to the community. Mansur, I have family members in the army and most armymen I know
are gentleman. It horrified me to read about rapes done my the Indian Peace Keeping
Forces in Jaffna. But after a point it was hard to deny a multiplicity of evidence.

rohit 1/14/2006 10:49 AM
it's going to happen. the rapes, i mean.
i mean, just look at it this way, you are a soldier, you have a wife back home, but you've
the sexual urge whenever you see this woman that belongs to the people that you've just
militarily subjugated. you try to woo her; if she refuses, as she will, in most cases, you will
rape her, because after all, you're the dominant force in her life right now and she'd better
do what you say, right?

if the army makes certain demands of the occupied people, they expect them to be
satisfied, otherwise they will do so by force. this not only applies to sexual gratification, but
also to food, fuel and other things the armed forces may require.
(OMkAr)
in olden days, when most armies weren't salaried soldiers, rape and pillage was a way of
boosting troop morale.

heck, the jat-maratha alliance broke up prior to the third battle of panipat because the
marathas refused the jats to plunder delhi, as it was a maratha protectorate. most armies
in the olden days paid their soldiers from the plunder of cities defeated.
1/14/2006 11:11 AM
@junaid

here is the HR Commission report [chapter on alleged atrocities by the Pakistan Army],
which, in my opinion, obviously favors the Pakistani establishment.

[You can find other chapters on wiki’s Tikka Khan entry]

Sandy yes, one might doubt the numbers put foreward by the bangladeshi side, but it would be
unwise for the pakistanis to put blind faith on its army. after all, the pakistani aam-janta will
have to continue to live with the army[-rule]

PS- why is tikka khan, “the butcher of east pakistan”, also known as “the butcher of
balochistan”? I found no mention of it on wiki.
1/14/2006 12:29 PM
Severely constrained for time.

Quick question. Suppose you find oil/gold/relics depot under your house; is it your property
or the property of the state?
Mullah
Mansur
@Rohit 1/14/2006 1:24 PM
But the fact that you can close your eyes and state things like there could hardly have
been more than a 100 rapes is just sad. Discounting the sexual violence the number of
civilians disappeared or killed, particularly at the University is again undeniable. Has
Pakistan ever issued an apology?

Aqdas
Dude, what have you been somkin'? Why are attributing stuff to me that I have never said?

Why should Pakistan deliver an apology? And, to whom?

3.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

A mistake has to accepted and recognized before an apology is submmitted. If PAK does
not recognize the authenticity of the charges then how can they issue and apology?

Along the same lines, then, why has Bangladesh not issued an apology for killing scores of
West Paksitanis?

Do you see the weakness of your arguments? In other words, if I had a penny for every
weakness in your arguments, I would be a millionaire.
mansur 1/14/2006 2:35 PM
depends on the kind of government, i guess.

a very capitalist government would say that it is your property.

a socialist government like india's would say that it's your property but you MUST sell it to
the government at a price fixed by the government.

maybe a more social democratic government will say that it's your property but you can
(OMkAr) only sell to certain people at market price a certain quantity fixed by the government, and
the rest you must sell to the government at a price fixed by the government.

a very socialist government would say that the property belongs to the government and
give you alternative property which you would HAVE to take.
1/14/2006 5:37 PM
However, to claim that certain natural resources that are found in Baluchistan are only for
the Baluchs is not only mean and ludicrous but outright treacherous.

they are not laying claims to it. they want a share in the revenue generated from it. the
natural gas which lits the cooking ranges of islamabad and lahore comes out from Sui and
yet the people of sui themselves cook using wood. why is that?

unless there is justice and equality there would be no harmony.

and can u give ur reasons for why bengalis wanted to have a separate state back in 1971?

the reasons are very much the same today in 2006 in balochistan.

@rohit

most army men are well disciplined during peace time. however war makes an animal out
of even the finest gentlemens. when u know there is no one to report to or answer to,
human nature can do miracles.
1/14/2006 7:20 PM
While the exact figure have been debated even conservative estimates put civilian deaths
into the millions. Its been argued that the number of dead far exceeded those in Rwanda
and Cambodia.

And i'll quote this:

The documents released on June 28 provide full coverage of the US policy towards India,
Pakistan, Afghanistan, and the newly created state of Bangladesh from January 1969 to
December 1972.

Mullah Documents from March to December 1971 include intelligence assessments, key
Mansur messages from the US embassies in Islamabad and New Delhi and the Consulate General
in Dhaka, responses to National Security Study memoranda and full transcripts of the
presidential tape recordings that are summarized and excerpted in editorial notes in
volume XI.

The historian branch of the State Department held a two-day conference on June 28 and
29 on US policy in South Asia between 1961 and 1972, inviting scholars from India,
Pakistan and Bangladesh to express their views on the declassified documents.

3.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

During the seminar, Bangladeshi scholars acknowledged that their official figure of more
than 3 million killed during and after the military action was not authentic.

They said that the original figure was close to 300,000, which was wrongly translated from
Bengali into English as three million.

Shamsher M. Chowdhury, the Bangladesh ambassador in Washington who was
commissioned in the Pakistan Army in 1969 but had joined his country’s war of liberation in
1971, acknowledged that Bangladesh alone cannot correct this mistake. Instead, he
suggested that Pakistan and Bangladesh form a joint commission to investigate the 1971
disaster and prepare a report.

Almost all scholars agreed that the real figure was somewhere between 26,000, as
reported by the Hamoodur Rahman Commission, and not three million, the official figure
put forward by Bangladesh and India.
1/14/2006 7:20 PM
While you might still continue to haggle about the 26,000 figure, I'm hoping at the very
least you will be shy of using the millions scale in the future.

Mullah
Mansur
1/14/2006 7:58 PM
@sandy

my point is that the real hamood-ur-rehman comission report was never allowed to be
published because it contained names of great soldiers like gen tiger ( the one with a tail)
niazi and company.

the small snippets of the report which we see today can very probably be forged ones.

lets hope the real report surfaces some where in the near future but its chances are very
less.

@aqdas

the fact that pakistan doesnt accept that a crime has been commited doesnt mean the
crime has REALLY NOT BEEN COMMITTED.

similarly if bengalis do not want to say sorry for killing west pakistanis , why should we also
relegate ourselves to the same low levels by following what they are doing.

accepting your own mistake doesnt make you a smaller person. it further makes you
strong.

however, if u dont want to accept that pakistani army didnt do any thing in 1971 , i dont
have any problem with that. you have a right to put forward your own suggestions and
views of history.

however, i hope that if u ever really come up with solid evidence that indeed pakistan army
did rape women and kill thousands, you will have the courage to change your opinion and
accept the dark murderous past of our army.
1/14/2006 8:07 PM
@sandy

i just had a quick look at the report.

i didnt find it pro-army.

it clearly speaks about the attitude of non-bengali army officers to the rest of bengalis.

3.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

and yes ofcourse bengalis were no angels either. after seeing their country torn apart by
outsiders they also must have wanted revenge and killed and raped any one they got their
hands on.

its simple: tit for tat.

Mansur 1/14/2006 8:29 PM
The common law rule is that whoeever has the best title to the property gets it. So if A robs
B of his wallet and drops it on the road where its picked by C. B has rights over C and A
has rights over both.

We enacted law for this called the Indian Treasure Trove Act.

Unlike Omkar's theory, the finder basically has to deposit it with the collector then the
public can make claims. Basically if someone can be shown to have better title to the
property then there is some sort of division between them.
Rohit
However if the treasure is found on public grounds and there are no claimiants the state
gets it.

Natural resources such as Oil can be compulosritly aquired by the state for certain
consideration.
1/14/2006 11:12 PM
@junaid

<<<…i didnt find it pro-army...and yes ofcourse bengalis were no angels either. after
seeing their country torn apart by outsiders they also must have wanted revenge and killed
and raped any one they got their hands on…its simple: tit for tat.>>>

But the report mentions:

“between 100,000 and 500,000 [west-pakistani/pro-pakistani] persons were slaughtered
during this period [March 1-25, 1971] by the Awami League militants.”

“….The crimes committed by the Awami League miscreants were bound to arouse anger
and bitterness in the minds of the troops, especially when they were not only confined to
barracks during the three weeks immediately preceding the military action, but were also
subjected to the severest of humiliations. They had seen their comerades insulted,
deprived of food and rations, and even killed without rhyme or reason. Tales of wholesale
slaughter of the families of West Pakistani officers and personnel of several units had also
reached the soldiers who were after all only human, and reacted violently in the process of
restoring the authority of the central government”
Sandy
i.e., the Bengalis killed the west-pakistanis before the March crackdown, and actually the
Pakistani army might have been the one taking revenge

Now is it believable that the Pakistani army waited until up to 5,00,000 west Pakistanis
were killed, that under martial law too?

Now, does it mean no biharis were killed after 16 dec, 1971? There must have been
revenge killings. I have no idea how many were killed, especially since the Indian army
probably wouldn’t have allowed the Bengalis take widespread revenge even if they wanted
to [how many surrendered Pakistani soldiers had been allowed to be lynched by the
Bengali mob?]

finally, I suspect the report to be biased because I find the figures put foreword by the
report ludicrous:

Bengalis killed: 26,000
West-pakistanis/ biharis killed: 1,00,000-5,00,000 [note the wide range]

3.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1/14/2006 11:16 PM
Also from the report:

“…Harrowing tales of these atrocities were narrated by the large number of West
Pakistanis and Biharis who were able to escape from these places and reached the safety
of West Pakistan. For days on end, all through the troubled month of March 1971, swarms
of terrorised non-Bengalis lay at the army controlled Dacca airport awaiting their turn to be
taken to the safety of West Pakistan…”

Now read this relatively recent Dawn article:

“…Bengalis are poised to celebrate their independence day on December 16. But what are
some 2.5 lakh ‘Pakistanis’, stranded in Bangladesh since 1971, doing here? …”

“…After independence, the government of Bangladesh offered the community two options
— staying back in Bangladesh as its nationals or repatriation to Pakistan. A total of
Sandy 5,29,669 non-Bengalis expressed their desire to go to Pakistan.”

“…After 32 years of broken promises by successive Pakistani governments, the bitterness
is now apparent. “The ruling elite of Pakistan, especially the politicians and bureaucrats,
are responsible for the plight of the stranded Pakistanis”, comments Nasim Khan,
president of the SPGRC.”

“Over Rs 100 crore has been collected in Pakistan for the cause of our repatriation and
settlement, but till today we have neither been repatriated nor helped financially with that
money,” says his deputy Ehtesham Khan. “In 2002, we met Gen. Musharraf when he
visited Dhaka and urged him to resolve our longstanding problem. He assured us of
repatriation, emphatically, and asked us to leave it to him. Not once, thrice! Today all I
want to ask him is, ‘Gen. Musharraf, we left it to you Sir but who did you leave it to?”

link
1/14/2006 11:20 PM
@sandy

again u must remember this is a part of the report declassified by the gov of pakistan after
almost 40 yrs.

plus if it was pro-army then why was it no declassified and made public right there in
1974?

it is openly known that this report contained the names of the top criminal/generals and
bhutto was in no mood to start another political crisis in pakistan. so he simply suppressed
the report.

and why has gov of pak only declassified only one part of the report. why not the whole of
it?

it simply point towards the fact that this report has been tampered with before declassifying
it.
1/14/2006 11:33 PM
Incidentally, why did Pakistan not take the Bihari civilians back? Bangladesh doesn't want
them, they want to leave and Pakistan doesn't want them. Aparently they live in HUGE
refugee camps outside Dhaka.

Rohit
1/14/2006 11:45 PM
@rohit

during nawaz sharif's time there was a program to re settle them back in pakistan.

3.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

i saw a news item on TV which was a documentary about biharis being brought back to
pakistan. a small town has been set up for them some where in punjab and hundreds of
biharis were settled in punjab.

ofcourse the limited resources of gov of pak do not allow all biharis to be accomodated.
1/15/2006 12:20 AM
<<<Aparently they live in HUGE refugee camps outside Dhaka>>>

there are big ones inside Dhaka too. The biharis make the best kababs in Dhaka, and
many well-off people frequent those dirty road-side eateries near the ‘Geneva camp’-
Sandy probably the largest one. There is no restriction on their movement. And many non-
bengalis, especially the ones who do not want to go to Pakistan- both rich [yes, many
successful businesses-including private airlines- are run by non-bengali families] and poor,
live outside the camps.
1/15/2006 12:43 AM
The problem is these are the same Biharis which actually left india in persuit of Pakistan
and now find themselves in a confused state......

$!^&hY@)( They could have had same freedom in India as well.. so all their sacrifice and labour bears
them nothing??
1/15/2006 10:13 AM
<<< ofcourse the limited resources of gov of pak do not allow all biharis to be
accomodated.>>>

of course Pakistani financial limitation is one major issue, but according to the following
report, “Pakistan’s domestic politics [*especially of mr Bhutto and his daughter*] and its
general disinterest in receiving the Biharis have prevented a permanent settlement of the
problem to date.”

“…Islamabad, however, was less interested and showed a lax attitude about the
repatriation of the Biharis except those who joined the East Pakistan Civil Armed Forces
and surrendered with the Pakistan Army. According to a Pakistani Foreign Ministry official:
“What are we supposed to do with them (the Biharis)? We have enough problems already.
Besides, you must remember that they are really Indian refugees.” Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the
first post-1971 civilian president of Pakistan, was even unwilling to admit any sizeable
number of ‘Bihari refugees’ to be repatriated to Pakistan.”

Sandy moreover, the report also states, “In 1988, a trust agreement was signed between Pakistan
and Rabita Al-Alam Al-Islami (an Islamic charity organization, hereafter Rabita) to expedite
the process of Bihari resettlement in Pakistan. A repatriation and resettlement plan was
drawn up which included the construction of 36,000 houses spread over 80 sites costing
about $278 million and with approximately $30 million for community services and $10
million for the transportation of the refugees. Despite elaborate preparations, the
repatriation process could not get off the ground.”

link

more on the condition of the biharis:

#1

#2
1/24/2006 12:31 AM
.
.
“East Pakistan: The end game” as the topic goes started right after the language riots in
Dhaka while Quaid was still alive. Thereafter there have been actions and retaliations from
the respective sides i.e. the ruling clique in the west and the people of East Pakistan with
its local leaders.
Syed
As early as 1964, I can recall my Bengali classmates in Karachi, used to say that the two

3.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

wings cannot and will not remain together. Religious papers Jasarat in Karachi and
Sangram in Dhaka used to incite local sentiments. In west we were told that struggle in the
east was Hindu led against Islam, while in Dhaka they used to print that the west is
exploiting and looting the East.

As pointed by Sandy in an earlier post there were atrocities by the Mukti Bahini prior to the
Yahya’s military action. I can recall the rumors that a shipload of mutilated bodies of west
Pakistanis arriving to Karachi harbor.

Contnued….. 1/24/2006 12:33 AM
.
.
My uncle who used to write for Pakistan observer (Dhaka) and remained under detention
during Yahya’s rule, used to say without mincing word, that the separation of the eastern
wing was formally decided by Ayub Khan. The Hamood Report points out towards Altaf
Gauhar (a bureaucrat) for drafting the famous Six Points of Mujeeb, and narrates an
occasion during the roundtable conference where Mujeeb first read his Six Points. The
report also gives you the reaction of the Bangali leaders Nurul Ameen and Mehmood Ali.
Syed
Punjabi landlords, Pak Army, and the bureaucracy in Islamabad could never ever conceive
the idea that the people can rule them; not than and not even now. Pray for the solidarity
and safety of what remains of Pakistan and keep up the good discussion.
1/24/2006 3:36 PM
nice insight into the events of 1971.

its always good to hear a first hand narrative of the events.

what were the feelings of west pakistanis immediately after 1971?

and is it true that in that time of great trouble LIbya gave an aid of almost a billion US
dollars to pakistan and rescued it from bankruptcy?
1/25/2006 1:06 AM
what were the feelings of west pakistanis immediately after 1971?

Every one was stunned and in a state of disbelief. It is almost 36 years after that event;
tears still roll over when I write these lines. This is the feeling whenever I am reminded of
that that event

That feeling was not only on this side of the divide the same was the case on the eastern
wing. At a later stage when Bhutto visited Bangladesh my uncle was also in the entourage.
Syed There were so many people to shake hands with him that when he came back to the hotel
his sleeve was torn out of his kurta. A fellow Bengali journalist of his was so moved that he
could not help and bite on his shoulder. He says that every one in the Dhaka press club
was crying loud like children as if some one was dead.
1/25/2006 1:41 AM
and is it true that in that time of great trouble LIbya gave an aid of almost a billion US
dollars to pakistan and rescued it from bankruptcy?

Colonel Muammar Gaddafi those days was a great friend of Pakistan, though I am not sure
of the amount of his contribution. Muammar Gaddafi, King Faisal, Houari Boumédienne,
Hafez al-Assad and many more were supportive and had vision for the progress of
Muslims in general and the third world in particular.

Syed The above were Muslims; they had to. Within weeks of the ceasefire between India and
Pakistan after the war of 71, Indira Gandhi, our adversary allowed Mazhar Ali Khan (Father
of Tariq Ali) and Syed Najiullah (my uncle), in their private capacity to travel to Bangladesh
through her country. Mujeeb ur Rahman welcomed them. The purpose was to explore if
we, Bangladesh and West Pakistan, can still live together as a confederation.

3.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1/25/2006 12:31 PM
A fellow Bengali journalist of his was so moved that he could not help and bite on his
shoulder

Umm..that sounded really strange.
Rohit
1/25/2006 4:43 PM
wow i never knew all this.

what was mujeeb's reaction to the proposal of still living together.
1/25/2006 11:00 PM
The thing died before it could take any start. The whole show was still under the radicals of
Mukti Bahini; followers of Tajuddin Ahmed and Major Ziaur Rahman. The emotions were
running high in Dhaka. Certain quarters were asking for the trial of the POW’s on
Nuremberg style. Mujeeb had yet to consolidate his position.

The visit was solely on the request of the two journalists Mazhar Ali Khan and Syed
Najiullah. Bhutto government in the west allowed them to proceed via India; we were yet to
recognize the new country of Bangladesh. They met Indira Gandhi in New Delhi, and
conditions were created for them to proceed to Dhaka. Mujeeb or the Bangladesh
Government did not object to the scheme. I don’t recall or remember if they met Mujeeb or
Syed not.

When both of them were in Dhaka Kausar Niazi (I think he was Information Minister of
Pakistan) issued a press statement that Mazhar Ali Khan and Syed Najiullah have gone to
Bangladesh on the invitation of Mujeeb. This was embarrassing for the authorities in
Dhaka. The moment Kausar Niazi statement was received in Dhaka both the journalist
were put in the military jeep and confined to the hotel until they were flown back.
1/26/2006 6:33 AM
It is and was an odd situation really!!!

the same army actually concieded to the Six points when all was lost.....but then again
what can you expect from a short Sighted person!!!

and even today its Bengalis who are actually called traitors for the Bifurcation rather the the
$!^&hY@)( People who actually "Master Mind" that!!!

also Its a Big mistake to think, a Illegtimate Leader, like an Army Chief will ever allow truth
to come out, as it was......

3.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=927339&tid=5043269&na=1&nst=1
Current affairs

Topic: whats the solution of kashmir in ur mind

whats the solution of kashmir in ur mind 12/14/2004 5:43 AM
what is solutiopn of kashmir in ur mind.
but remember one thing all 3 parties shoul accept this. and tell us bout the current situation
of kashmir and behavior of inda ,pakistan ,and the world about kashmir

Mian
an independant state of Kashmir 1/17/2005 1:11 AM
as salam u alaykum

both india & pak r after the state
why dont they let the kashmiris decide their fate???

or lets have a UNITED STATES OF ISLAM with kashmir in it as a state??
2/9/2005 2:00 AM
both should idopak b fexibe to solve the problem

Saba
9/4/2005 9:33 PM
Just make the UN resolutions 47 of 1948 and resolution 122 of 1957 self implementing,
mandatory and binding on both India and Pakistan. The matter will be solved immediately
and with absolute fairness, Just like it happened in the case of East Timor Indonesia.
Alternatively you can drag this issue for another 100 years.

Resolution 47 adopted by the Security Council at its 268th meeting of the Security Council
of April 21, 1948
http://www.contactpakistan.com/kashmir/kashmir-resolutions.htm#1st
Syed
Resolution 122 adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January 1957,
concerning the India–Pakistan Question
http://www.contactpakistan.com/kashmir/kashmir-resolutions.htm#6
9/28/2005 10:02 AM
sir jrr baat to aapne bauhat achi kee hai but we've lost our right to take up the kashmir
issue at the UN in 1972 .... simla accord....
so lets wait another 100 years

Xain
Simla Agreement 9/28/2005 8:07 PM
Below is the agreement tell me which clause bars us form going to the UN.
Simla Agreement on Bilateral Relations between India and Pakistan signed by Prime
Minister of India, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, and President of Pakistan, Mr. Z. A. Bhutto, in Simla
on July 3, 1972.
The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two
countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their
relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and the
establishment of durable peace in the subcontinent, so that both countries may henceforth
devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the welfare of their
people.
Syed In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan
have agreed as follows:
1. That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the
relations between the two countries.
2. That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means
mutually agreed upon between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems
between the two countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall

4.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

prevent the organization, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the
maintenance of peaceful and harmonious relations.
3. That the prerequisite for reconciliation, good neighbourliness and durable peace
between them is a commitment by both the countries to peaceful co-existence, respect for
each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty and non-interference in each other’s
internal affairs, on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.
4. That the basic issues and causes of conflict which have bedevilled the relations between
the two countries for the last twenty-five years shall be resolved by peaceful means.
5. That they shall always respect each other’s national unity, territorial integrity, political
independence and sovereign equality.
9/28/2005 8:09 PM
6. That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations, they will refrain from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each other.
Both Governments will take all steps within their power to prevent hostile propaganda
directed against each other. Both countries will encourage the dissemination of such
information as would promote the development of friendly relations between them.
In order progressively to restore and normalise relations between the two countries step by
step, it was agreed that:
1. Steps shall be taken to resume communications, postal, telegraphic, sea, land including
border posts and air links including over-flights.
2. Appropriate steps shall be taken to promote travel facilities for the nationals of the other
country.
3. Trade and cooperation in economic and other agreed fields will be resumed as far as
possible.
4. Exchange in the field of science and culture will be promoted.
In this connection delegations from the two countries will meet from time to time to work
Syed out the necessary details.
In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the
Governments agree that:
1. Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border.
2. In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-fire of December 17,
1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of
either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences
and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use
of force in violation of this line.
3. The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this agreement and shall be
completed within a period of thirty days thereof.
9/28/2005 8:10 PM
This agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their
respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on
which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.
Both Governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually
convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides
will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of
Syed durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions of repatriation of
prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the
resumption of diplomatic relations.
9/28/2005 8:32 PM
I like to remind you that at the time of this agreement, we were a looser country; India had
our soldiers as prisoners of war numbering 90000 in its POW camps, and a lot of territory
to be negotiated and regained control over it. The common soldiers in Indian camps and
their families here in Pakistan were languishing, pleading, and looking at their leader ship
for their release. Please don’t include Niazi and few other senior brasses that were
enjoying their time and allowed shopping in Indian cities with their wives.

When it comes to solving the problems UN can act on its own and twist arms of weaker
Syed countries to please super powers; the example of East Timor, Iraq etc, if the UN decides to
delay it can be thousand years depending on the wish of the powerful countries.

It will be of interest to you that during 1960s countries deprived of international justice were
seriously planning to quit the UN. Go through the UN record to find out how many Vetoes

4.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

have been there on the UN floor on the Kashmir issue.
Veto over kashmir 9/28/2005 11:43 PM
@syed

Sir based on what u said here is one reported veto by USSR over kashmir . i had it saved
but i couldnt find the link .

On 14 February a draft resolution was proposed by Australia, Cuba, the United
Kingdom, and the United States, which noted Pakistan’s proposal for a temporary
United Nations force for affecting demilitarization in Kashmir, and expressed the
belief that the use of such a force deserved consideration. The resolution requested
the President of the Security Council, the representative of Sweden, Mr. Gunnar Jarring, to
proceed to the subcontinent to examine proposals for demilitarization or otherwise
achieving progress towards the settlement of the dispute. The Soviet Union was severely
opposed to the idea of a UN military intervention and proposed amendments to this
Alost resolution that sought to omit references to demilitarization and to a United Nations
temporary force. Mr. Arkady Sobolev said that his government considered that

“the Kashmir question has in actual fact already been settled in essence by the people of
Kashmir themselves, who consider their territory an integral part of the Republic of India.”

But the Soviet representative did not stop at that. He denounced the idea of holding a
plebiscite in Kashmir

The Council rejected the Soviet amendments. When it came to voting on the resolution,
it was defeated when the USSR exercised its 79th veto in the Security Council.

@ mr syed 10/4/2005 9:43 AM
thanx for the extensive agreement but mr ikram rabbani and mr farooq bajwa in their
boooks on pakistans history state that in return for the POWs pak had to loose the right of
taking up the matter at un
and yea the un has never acted seroiusly on kashmir issue
Xain
10/9/2005 2:39 AM
I gave you the actual text of the Simla Agreement. As far as I comprehend after reading
the text of the agreement there is no clause which bars us from going to the UN. I don’t like
to question the integrity of these fellows’ bajwa and rabbani, I haven’t read them, but there
have been several dishonest people who have been telling lies or half truth about Mr.
Bhutto just to malign him. When you grow up you will realize that history is a subject
reflecting only the views of the rulers and not the facts.

You will find historians like you mentioned above thriving during the rule of dictators.
Professor Ghafoor of Jamat and all his coligues who were against Bhutto and working on
Syed the platform of PNA to overthrow him in 1977 used to term 73 constitution as Bhutto’s
constitution and would argue against it on TV during 80s, now they realize that it is the only
unanimous constitution and essential for the survival of this nation. Check the old copies of
daily Jasarat and Chattan printed during the 70s you will find a lot of venom against the
personality of Bhutto.
10/10/2005 10:23 AM
i really didnt read the agreement at first just skimmed it.......
now that ive read it.... sir kindly comprehend this
pak was in a loosers situation and we needed the release of 90000 pows ....
what is the CONSIDERATION to india on the agreed terms???
release 90000 pows for this??
btw where did u get this script from, and its not only these authors the books ive
mentioned, ive consulted highly well read and literate ppl on the matter...
Xain they do agree with me.....
dont know whats true im quoting whats been written in text books too........ now
educationists dont want to poision their students against their own nation

4.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

conclusively, i might not understand politics much but i do understand simple logic: why
would a country like india in a position like 1971 not squeezze pak like a lemon to get the
max benefits....
c'mon these agreements are PEANUTS (hope u get the peanuts' metaphor- gen zia)
10/11/2005 8:11 PM
i really didnt read the agreement at first just skimmed it.......

Following are a few sources, not all are Pakistan or Bhutto friendly
http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/shimla.htm
http://www.kashmir-information.com/LegalDocs/SimlaAgreement.html
http://www.stimson.org/southasia/?sn=sa20020114291
http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/documents/simla.html

now that ive read it.... sir kindly comprehend this
pak was in a loosers situation and we needed the release of 90000 pows ....
what is the CONSIDERATION to india on the agreed terms???
release 90000 pows for this??

These are the things that have made me admire Mr. Bhutto. He was great.

btw where did u get this script from, and its not only these authors the books ive
mentioned, ive consulted highly well read and literate ppl on the matter...
they do agree with me.....
Syed dont know whats true im quoting whats been written in text books too........ now
educationists dont want to poision their students against their own nation

The authors of the text books the highly well read and literate people have been
dishonest and have told lies about Bhutto.

conclusively, i might not understand politics much but i do understand simple logic: why
would a country like india in a position like 1971 not squeezze pak like a lemon to get the
max benefits....

Only Bhutto or Indira Gahdhi, are the figures who can let you know how it happened.
Bhutto was capable of doing such magic; he was just great. I can’t tell you what we
have lost in that personality. The declassified documents of the US government
reveal that there was a lot of international pressure on India to reconcile with
Pakistan.
Continued… 10/11/2005 8:14 PM
c'mon these agreements are PEANUTS (hope u get the peanuts' metaphor- gen zia)

You can’t describe Zia with any decent set of words and the text book writers were
his lackeys and boot lickers. Rule of generals is the worst kind of ailment and
misfortune of Pakistan. You can’t run away form the international pact and
agreements. You can get maximum leverage if you are not prejudiced against
Bhutto and capable to make use of those documents.
Syed
To conclude I warn you not to write what is true or logical in the answer sheet in
your exams. Just keep your answer to what the text book says. Even the present
regime is extremely anti Bhutto.
10/11/2005 10:00 PM
Bajwa and Rabbani are not honest people if they were honest they should have produced
the text of the Simla Agreement in the text books and argued point by point to make their
point. I know of these books my own children have read these books in their O Levels and
in foundation year of professional degree. I taught to them that this is the truth but you
must write what is taught to you in the schools and colleges.

As a student of O Levels you have the liberty to put both the views and can get away
Syed securing the marks. But if you are appearing through some Pakistani board you have no
chance of getting marks and praising Bhutto at the same time. Our ruling clique can do any
thing to remain in absolute power. Bhutto died 28 years ago but our ruling establishment

4.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

and bureaucrats with or without uniform are afraid of him. They can mislead their own
coming generations to discredit Bhutto.

My additional post is to make sure that trying to speak the truth you may fail in your exams.
In my BSc I have been a victim of such situation. I failed trying to write the logic and truth in
the examination. If the examiner is a Bhutto fan you will get away but if the examiner
happens to be one of the disciples of Bajwa/Rabbani then you had it. All the kids please
take care.
10/14/2005 3:41 AM
sir i dont know why this discussion has steered away to protecting mr bhuttos image.... no
where in my scripts is there any thing against him... i do admire his personality........

secondly i mentioned zais name to give you the reference oof the historic metaphor
Xain PEANUTS... it was when zia refused us aid saying it was peanuts
11/6/2005 1:38 AM
both the countries pak and ind wants that kashmir should become an state of their
country,but kashmiris only wants freedom so they sould be given freedom and kashmir
should become an independet state but it is only their bad luck that the international
community is not giving the importance as much as it requires.when the indo pak continent
was separated it was decided that the muslim majority areas should be included in
pakistan and as kashmir is also a muslim majority state then why the indian government is
UZAIR creating a dispute over kashmir and because of this dispute only the kashmiris are
SHAH suffering a so the best solution of kashmir is that kashmir should become an independent
country.
11/8/2005 12:51 PM
wo he jo umn ka mutaliba tha haqa i raya dahi.laikn badqusmati say ab ya mutaliba
tabdeel hota nazar aa raha hay aur kashmari ya nahi samajh rahay kay wo Afganistan
banay ja rahay haan.PAkistan say ilhaq main he dono ki bahtari hay

$humil@

4.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=709633&tid=20219975
IPFC SNOBS

Topic: Kashmir - Instrument of Accession!

Kashmir - Instrument of Accession! 8/12/2005 6:38 AM
I have created this topic only so that the Pakistani community at large get to read the
original scanned copy of the Instrument of Accession that makes Jammu and Kashmir a
legal part of India, in the eyes of the law as well as the world.

This is not a story or somebody's opinion.
It is not propaganda. It is a legal document that speaks for itself.
You may have read several diffeent things in your textbooks at school and college, which
may have told you several stories.

This however is the truth of the matter and I hope your God helps you see the light..

I wish to place before you the scan of the original Instrument of Accession, a standard legal
document, that incorporated Jammu and Kashmir as part of India, on October 26, 1947.
The validity of this document has never been in question and a copy of the document was
made available to the UN too.

Please read the document. It is quite brief and clear.

----------------------------------------
The Instrument of Accession is a standard document which India used, to sign in as many
Bhaskar as 550 odd Princely States and Kingdoms into the Indian Union.
This legal document was an unconditional document entered into by the said
Principlaity/Kingdom and India.

This was the standard document that was signed by the Maharaja of Kashmir on October
26, 1947.

Read the scanned copy of the Original Instrument of Accession and note that the entire
agreement has been filled in a standardised format.

The signatory for India was the Governor General of independent India, Lord Mountbatten.

The Instrument of Accession forms the basis of India's claim of Jammu and Kashmir.

Naturally, only one country can have a sole and legal claim over a State and in this
case it is India.

It is a legally binding and valid claim on Kashmir just as India has a legal and valid claim on
all the 550 odd states that were thus signed and incorporated into the Indian Union in 1947.
8/12/2005 9:55 AM
Is there any unbiased article/documentary stating/showing on what condition did the king
signed the document?

Unknown
8/12/2005 10:08 AM
Darn! Bhaskar u for got the conspiracy theorists here

K-boy
8/12/2005 10:11 AM
Bipan Chandra writes and others agree that the Maharajah was forced by circumstances to
sign the agreement. Pakistani army in civvies (debatable) and Afridi Tribesmen had already
crossed over into Kashmir and the Indian government offered military assistance only on
accession. This is of course, historical analysis, I am not aware of a particular document
which can prove this.

Rohit Furthermore Sheikh Abdullah and the National Conference had already been in favor of
merging with India.
PS Hari Singh was a pretty bad ruler and administator.

5.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Hinstory after 10/27/1947 8/12/2005 10:36 AM
Indian Pledges

In his telegram to the Prime Minister of Pakistan, the Indian Prime Minister Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru said, "I should like to make it clear that the question of aiding Kashmir in
this emergency is not designed in any way to influence the state to accede to India. Our
view which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any
disputed territory or state must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we
adhere to this view". (Telegram 402 Primin-2227 dated 27th October, 1947 to PM of
Pakistan repeating telegram addressed to PM of UK).

In other telegram to the PM of Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, "Kashmir's accession to India
was accepted by us at the request of the Maharaja's government and the most numerously
representative popular organization in the state which is predominantly Muslim. Even then
Unknown it was accepted on condition that as soon as law and order had been restored, the people
of Kashmir would decide the question of accession. It is open to them to accede to either
Dominion then". (Telegram No. 255 dated 31 October, 1947).

In his broadcast to the nation over All India Radio on 2nd November, 1947, Pandit Nehru
said, "We are anxious not to finalise anything in a moment of crisis and without the fullest
opportunity to be given to the people of Kashmir to have their say. It is for them ultimately
to decide ------ And let me make it clear that it has been our policy that where there is a
dispute about the accession of a state to either Dominion, the accession must be made by
the people of that state. It is in accordance with this policy that we have added a proviso to
the Instrument of Accession of Kashmir".
8/12/2005 10:38 AM
In another broadcast to the nation on 3rd November, 1947, Pandit Nehru said, "We have
declared that the fate of Kashmir is ultimately to be decided by the people. That pledge we
have given not only to the people of Kashmir and to the world. We will not and cannot back
out of it".

In his letter No. 368 Primin dated 21 November, 1947 addressed to the PM of Pakistan,
Pandit Nehru said, "I have repeatedly stated that as soon as peace and order have been
established, Kashmir should decide of accession by Plebiscite or referendum under
international auspices such as those of United Nations".

In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 25th November, 1947, Pandit Nehru
said, "In order to establish our bonafide, we have suggested that when the people are
given the chance to decide their future, this should be done under the supervision of an
Unknown impartial tribunal such as the United Nations Organisation. The issue in Kashmir is whether
violence and naked force should decide the future or the will of the people".

In his statement in the Indian Constituent Assembly on 5th March, 1948, Pandit Nehru said,
"Even at the moment of accession, we went out of our way to make a unilateral declaration
that we would abide by the will of the people of Kashmir as declared in a plebiscite or
referendum. We insisted further that the Government of Kashmir must immediately become
a popular government. We have adhered to that position throughout and we are prepared
to have a Plebiscite with every protection of fair voting and to abide by the decision of the
people of Kashmir".
8/12/2005 10:40 AM
In his press-conference in London on 16th January, 1951, as reported by the daily
"Statesman" on 18th January, 1951, Pandit Nehru stated, "India has repeatedly offered to
work with the United Nations reasonable safeguards to enable the people of Kashmir to
express their will and is always ready to do so. We have always right from the beginning
accepted the idea of the Kashmir people deciding their fate by referendum or plebiscite. In
fact, this was our proposal long before the United Nations came into the picture. Ultimately
the final decision of the settlement, which must come, has first of all to be made basically
by the people of Kashmir and secondly, as between Pakistan and India directly. Of course
it must be remembered that we (India and Pakistan) have reached a great deal of
Unknown agreement already. What I mean is that many basic features have been thrashed out. We
all agreed that it is the people of Kashmir who must decide for themselves about their
future externally or internally. It is an obvious fact that even without our agreement no
country is going to hold on to Kashmir against the will of the Kashmiris".

In his report to All Indian Congress Committee on 6th July, 1951 as published in the

5.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Statesman, New Delhi on 9th July, 1951, Pandit Nehru said, "Kashmir has been wrongly
looked upon as a prize for India or Pakistan. People seem to forget that Kashmir is not a
commodity for sale or to be bartered. It has an individual existence and its people must be
the final arbiters of their future. It is here today that a struggle is bearing fruit, not in the
battlefield but in the minds of men".
8/12/2005 10:40 AM
In a letter dated 11th September, 1951, to the U.N. representative, Pandit Nehru wrote,
"The Government of India not only reaffirms its acceptance of the principle that the
question of the continuing accession of the state of Jammu and Kashmir to India shall be
decided through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite under the
auspices of the United Nations but is anxious that the conditions necessary for such a
plebiscite should be created as quickly as possible".

As reported by Amrita Bazar Patrika Calcutta, on 2nd January, 1952, while replying to Dr.
Mookerji's question in the Indian Legislature as to what the Congress Government going to
do about one third of territory still held by Pakistan, Pandit Nehru said, " is not the property
Unknown
of either India or Pakistan. It belongs to the Kashmiri people. When Kashmir acceded to
India, we made it clear to the leaders of the Kashmiri people that we would ultimately abide
by the verdict of their Plebiscite. If they tell us to walk out, I would have no hesitation in
quitting. We have taken the issue to United Nations and given our word of honour for a
peaceful solution. As a great nation we cannot go back on it. We have left the question for
final solution to the people of Kashmir and we are determined to abide by their decision".
8/12/2005 10:41 AM
In his statement in the Indian Parliament on 7th August, 1952, Pandit Nehru said, "Let me
say clearly that we accept the basic proposition that the future of Kashmir is going to be
decided finally by the goodwill and pleasure of her people. The goodwill and pleasure of
this Parliament is of no importance in this matter, not because this Parliament does not
have the strength to decide the question of Kashmir but because any kind of imposition
would be against the principles that this Parliament holds. Kashmir is very close to our
minds and hearts and if by some decree or adverse fortune, ceases to be a part of India, it
will be a wrench and a pain and torment for us. If, however, the people of Kashmir do not
wish to remain with us, let them go by all means. We will not keep them against their will,
however painful it may be to us. I want to stress that it is only the people of Kashmir who
can decide the future of Kashmir. It is not that we have merely said that to the United
Nations and to the people of Kashmir, it is our conviction and one that is borne out by the
policy that we have pursued, not only in Kashmir but everywhere. Though these five years
have meant a lot of trouble and expense and in spite of all we have done, we would
Unknown willingly leave if it was made clear to us that the people of Kashmir wanted us to go.
However sad we may feel about leaving we are not going to stay against the wishes of the
people. We are not going to impose ourselves on them on the point of the bayonet".

In his statement in the Lok Sabha on 31st March, 1955 as published in Hindustan Times
New Delhi on Ist April, 1955, Pandit Nehru said, " Kashmir is perhaps the most difficult of
all these problems between India and Pakistan. We should also remember that Kashmir is
not a thing to be bandied between India and Pakistan but it has a soul of its own and an
individuality of its own. Nothing can be done without the goodwill and consent of the people
of Kashmir".
8/12/2005 10:41 AM
In his statement in the Security Council while taking part in debate on Kashmir in the 765th
meeting of the Security Council on 24th January, 1957, the Indian representative Mr.
Krishna Menon said, "So far as we are concerned, there is not one word in the statements
that I have made in this council which can be interpreted to mean that we will not honour
international obligations. I want to say for the purpose of the record that there is nothing
that has been said on behalf of the Government of India which in the slightest degree
Unknown
indicates that the Government of India or the Union of India will dishonour any international
obligations it has undertaken".

8/12/2005 10:46 AM
Excellent reply Crabby

I have always maintained History should be studied with objectivity. Not bais,One sided
Aquaris view always distort reality...

5.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Here's the evidence now show me your proof! 8/12/2005 10:53 AM
Nothing takes away the power of the document that is the Instrument of Accession.

People can rant, wail, whine and speak of conspiracy theories all they want. However it
does not take away the fact that the people of India and the people of Kashmir are bound
by it, as this is an Agreement signed by two sovereign entities.

Neither can any third party intervene or make null, modify or superimpose a valid
constitutionally binding agreement between two parties.

That said, what Nehru said or didn't say ( though I would like to see scans of the original
telegrams as I have enough reason to believe that the wordings provided in various internet
sources have been tampered with and are just crap)subsequently is quite meaningless as
Bhaskar the Agreement was not conditional in any way and was a standard document applicable to
the signatories of all the 550 odd princely states that signed it.

Given that the 1972 Simla agreement stands, the UN position on this too becomes
irrelevant as it is mutually agreed by India and Pakistan that they would solve the problem
bilaterally.

To re-assert the Instrument of Accession itself is a powerful legal document which any
eminent jurist would confirm and this is the sole basis of India's legal claim.
A legally valid claim is what the international community is concerned about and Pakistan
does not have one.
8/12/2005 10:56 AM
In his statement in the Security Council while taking part in debate on Kashmir in the 765th
meeting of the Security Council on 24th January, 1957, the Indian representative Mr.
Krishna Menon said,...

Bhaskar Krishna Menon said a lot of things in that marathon 7 hour speech that day and I have not
only read that speech in detail but also put up the entire text here, which runs to some 160
pages. It would do you well to read it too, if you haven't.
8/12/2005 11:59 AM
yes you provided a scanned document from where - from the Home Ministry of
India....show me the same from UN website, then it'll be proved that its indeed a real
document and not a forged one.Also, had it been so real why is it not being produced in
any international forum?In the court of law,if something is proven to be signed on coercion
Unknown or force tjhe entire document might become invalid as well.
Is it a debate!!! 8/12/2005 12:03 PM
What this person is saying is that only I am true, and everything else is false?Does it
represent a debate?He wants us to believe in his document, but we should turn a blind eye
on the political perspective of that time, and also the verbal assuarnces that came out from
Indian Govt following the accession...WHY?
Unknown
8/12/2005 12:18 PM
Also, had it been so real why is it not being produced in any international forum?

There is no reason to produce any legal documents between two sovereign entities in any
forum, international or otherwise, unless circumstances demand.
Your ignorance is amply reflected when you say that the copy of the document is not
available with the UN, which was submitted in the same marathon speech that you
quoted,as part of the annexures.

Read India's official position and its statements on events as they occured, before talking
Bhaskar about what India did or didn't do.
I at least produced a scaned document, which no right minded level headed person will say
is fake except the likes of you. Never mind that.
Look at what you produced as counter arguments from an unnamed source ... absolute
trash.

You are also absolutely oblivious of the fact nothing you wrote takes away the power
of the Instrument of Accession.
Such is its legal power.

5.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

The reason I dug this out, is because a Paki, also a Snob, made a statement elsewhere
that the Instrument of Accession was a fake prepared by India in the 1970s.
Imagine Hari Singh died in 1961. Karan Singh is still alive. Mountbatten was alive well
through the 70s and is internationally respected and lastly the copy of the IoA was
submitted to the UN in the mid-50s.

Crabby by imputing a fraud, a criminal act, on India in this matter, you again repeatedly
demonstrate that you cannot desist from getting crappy. Maybe it is the result of your
commie rural education that has resulted in providing you with such an impoversihed moral
outlook. But that is you.

I don't want to have any dialogue with such a person.
Unnamed Source!!!!! 8/12/2005 12:26 PM
The whole thing was taken from the homepage of Kashmiri - Canadian Council...and
believe it or not, they do exist and protest against the unjust annexation of Kashmir to India
in a civil way which ofcourse you do not want to listen and brand as crap...

http://www.kashmiri-cc.ca

Unknown Its upto you who you want to have dialogue with,but in the court of law circumstances can
prove that the Accession document was signed under coercion and hence is invalid...is
Indian Govt prepared enough to take the challenge?
8/12/2005 12:44 PM
but in the court of law circumstances can prove that the Accession document was signed
under coercion

Which crappy 2 bit site told you now that it was signed under coercion?
Do you even understand the meaning of the word?
If the Maharaja was under pressure, it was because the Paki invaders were closing in on
Srinagar and India was not about to send troops to defend Kashmir without knowing the
Maharaja's mind on the issue. So the Instrument of Accession was signed on the 26th and
the Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar airport on the 27th.
Where is the coercion? The Maharaja needn't have signed at all. And the sequence of
events has been corroborated not only by western observers during that time but also
Karan Singh the Maharaja's son.
Bhaskar
And you think that the Kashmir-Canadian Council is some sort of an authority?
You obviously have a problem with recognising credibility and that clearly shows up on
yours too, quite unsurprisingly.

What you come up with is unsubstantiated meaningless trash. Putting up trashy responses
in the face of indisputable evidence, isn't going to alter the situation that you are absolutely
in the wrong. Like I said it just does not matter what Nehru said after the event to the world
at large, even as PM of India, as nothing he says even in his official capacity can negate an
official agreement signed between two sovereign entities, but you need to have studied a
bit of law to know that.
8/12/2005 12:59 PM
Dont worry, Kashmiri candian Association may not be the only authority on this issue, but
definitely they are one of them...they are formed with people displaced from the valley due
to atrocity of Indiann army...

Dude, cant you even find out the fallacy in you arguement......after signing the agreement
nehru says..."I should like to make it clear that the question of aiding Kashmir in this
emergency is not designed in any way to influence the state to accede to India. Our view
which we have repeatedly made public is that the question of accession in any disputed
Unknown territory or state must be decided in accordance with wishes of people and we adhere to
this view".

So, you promise something to the person, get him to sign, and then ditch him...you are
actually supporting this???
8/12/2005 1:14 PM
You keep repeating the same crap about Nehru's utterances without showing proof.
I'm not going to take your word for it nor quotes from some random rabid site on the issue
which does not lay out things in sequence and context.
Bhaskar

5.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Besides, what Nehru said after the fact no way takes away what the Maharaja was signing,
the Instrument of Accession.
What was signed, was standard text, used to sign up all other principalities/kingdoms and
the Maharaja was completely aware of what it meant.

Again, it was the Maharaja who sought India's help and India laid out the conditions
underwhich it could intervene on the matter. The Maharaja agreed to it and thus the
Instrument of Accession was signed which brought about the ACCESSION of Kashmir.
India did not ANNEX Kashmir, though your ignorant warped mind may lead you to think so
given your views on India.
It was Pakistan through its citizens, displayed a show of force and ANNEXED a part of
Kashmir.

I suggest that you UNDERSTAND contexts first properly and in sequence, and then
LEARN the meanings of words like COERCION, ANNEXATION AND ACCESSION.

8/12/2005 1:48 PM
You might be hell bent on showing one piece of paper...but as i said earlier the perspective
was as important as the actual agreement...so dont just think that the paper will accepted
without any question which you want and is telling agai and again....lets see the
perspective from another source...

Exactly when Hari Singh signed the Instrument of Accession has been hotly debated for
over 50 years.

Official Indian accounts state that in the early hours of the morning of 26 October, Hari
Singh fled from Srinagar, arriving in Jammu later in the day, where he was met by V P
Menon, representative of Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru, and signed the Instrument of
Accession.

On the morning of 27 October, Indian troops were airlifted into Srinagar.

Recent research, from British sources, has indicated that Hari Singh did not reach
Jammu until the evening of 26 October and that, due to poor flying conditions, V P
Menon was unable to get to Jammu until the morning of 27 October , by which time
Indian troops were already arriving in Srinagar.

In order to support the thesis that the Maharaja acceded before Indian troops landed,
Indian sources have now suggested that Hari Singh signed an Instrument of
Unknown
Accession before he left Srinagar but that it was not made public until later.

This was because Hari Singh had not yet agreed to include the Kashmiri leader, Sheikh
Abdullah, in his future government. To date no authentic original document has been made
available.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/1762146.stm

Question...

(1)How many Instrument of Accession was signed?

(2)If it is one, then where, and what time of the day?Why is the place not written in the
document?Also why is the month August crossed, and October written by hand?

(3)If it is more than one, then I am assuming that this one is the latter one as it is signed by
Mountbatten too (assuimng king signed it in his presence),then as per the British
researchers Indian troops were sent before signing...
8/12/2005 1:54 PM
the accession which is clearly illegal...

(4)If the king fled Jammu and Kashmir how can he have authority of signing something on
behalf of Jammu and Kashmir?
Unknown

5.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/12/2005 2:21 PM
It does not matter what some female Brit reporter has to say on the matter. Besides the
author loses credibility and indicates bias when she uses the word 'fled' to describe Hari
Singh's departure from Srinagar to Jammu for a pre-arranged meeting, both cities within
the same kingdom! She further states that Hari Singh died in 1962.
Hari Singh died on April 26, 1961.
Quite loose with the facts isn't she? So much for her research and her credibility.
There will always be people to write such stories as the mushrooming number of
conspiracy sites show evidence.

Now if Hari Singh came to Jammu all the way from Srinagar for a pre-arranged meeting it
cannot be quite termed coercion by India can it?

By saying so you not only sully his reputation but the reputation of India through your lies.

Bhaskar There is every reason to believe that the Instrument of Accession is precisely what it is,
though there will be great many who would want to lend their twist to the entire issue by
attempting to discredit it.The Maharaja signed on the document and that is all that matters
and this is something even his son confirms. The document is legal and valid and binding
on all the people of India and Kashmir.
The entire affair is between two sovereign States, India and Kashmir, and no other country
need be bothered about it. Particularly a country that was busy invading Kashmir,
plundering, killing and raping Kashmiris while all this happened.

In all this people lose sight of THE ISSUE. Nothing takes away the fact that The Instrument
of Accession is valid and a legal document between India and the State of Jammu and
Kashmir, that is binding on all people of the two sovereign states unconditionally.
8/12/2005 2:32 PM
The document does not say 'where' it was signed,hopefully I havent missed some of the
illegible things there...can you point out 'where' it was signed solely from the document?On
what basis are you sayng that it was signed in Jammu in the presence of Mountbatten?And
also what time of the day was it signed?Before or after Indian troops were airlifted in
Kashmir?
Unknown
I dint get these answers from your post...
Mr Bhaskar 8/12/2005 2:33 PM
If india Had this document,and they think its legal and valid
then please tell me who took this matter to UN for discussion and resolution...?
Aquaris
8/12/2005 2:37 PM
Aquaris, first let him prove that the document was signed in Jammu in presence of
Mountbatten...did you find any mention of Jammu in the document?heck even the most
insignificant document does mention the place where it is signed.

Unknown
8/12/2005 2:38 PM
No I did not....!!

Aquaris
Shifty arguments! 8/12/2005 5:54 PM
first let him prove that the document was signed in Jammu in presence of Mountbatten...did
you find any mention of Jammu in the document?

Let us you have shifted arguments on the subject in this very thread:

1. You have alleged that the king was coerced.

Bhaskar 2. Then you spoke of all the pledges/rants made by Nehru as if that in some way will take
away the merit of the document.

3. You alleged some telegrams had been sent without proof which did not address the
validity of the document.

5.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

4. Then you wanted the original document on a UN website.

5. You wanted to know why it was not produced in an international forum.

6. You wanted us to consider the political perspective at that time.

7. You refuse to understand the full meaning of a legal document yet want to give credence
to one sided verbal assurances given to assorted parties, devoid of context.

8. You do not want to believe the Govt of India source but will freely believe an internet
source of questionable repute.

9. You imply that something was promised after signing when in fact the document is
clearly unconditional.

10. You pull out a conspiracy theory by an author whose article has basic factual errors.

11. You suddenly want to know how many IoA were there and why the month of August
crossed by hand?

12. You imply that the king 'fled' from Srinagar to Jammu, both cities in his own kingdom
and theefore mysteriously losing aithority to sign on behalf of his kingdom.

13. You now state that the document does not say where, as if that takes away away the
merit of the document.

14. You mention that even the most insignificant document mentions where it is signed,as if
that takes away the merit of the document.

15. You want to know whether now it was signed in Jammu/elsewhere in the presence of
Mountbatten.

These are all shifty arguments that do not detract in any way the power of the argument,
but only highlight your intellectual insecurities in accepting the document.
So What is your argument? 8/12/2005 6:13 PM
There are several things that you need to grapple with here to remove the cobwebs that
cloud your understanding.

1. It is perfectly OK for one to sign a standard document and send it across for signing to
the other party. This could well have been done and it is entirely possible that the Maharaja
had the standard signed document with him, given to him in advance so he peruse it and
make up his mind and call and confirm to Delhi when he was willing to sign it so it could
personally collected by the representative of the Govt of India.

2. The place is mentioned in the document, only so it records the jurisdiction of the court
when an agreement comes under dispute. In this case the recourse to the dispute is
mentioned in the Instrument of Accession itself, so no place need be mentioned.

3. The date of signing is relevant only if on the said date both signatories do not have the
powers to sign the document as representatives of their respective sovereign entities. That
was not the case here.
Bhaskar
4. Thus from the above, it is perfectly legal and not incongrous, if the Maharaja had signed
the available document with him on the 26th and even if Menon had landed on the 27th to
collect it. The document is still valid.

5. Even if the document had been had been dated the 27th, which it is not, and the Indian
troops had landed in Srinagar on the 27th, nothing takes away the merit of the document.

6. It mus tbe known, that around 550 principalities/kingdoms signed in on the Instrument of
Accession and it is entirely likely that the original drafts were all dated for the month of
August 1947. The fact that it was struck out and corrected lends validity to the Document in
question.

I have not seen a single arguemnt from you take away the merit of the Instrument of
Accession, the power that a legal constitutionally approved binding document enjoys. Your

5.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

arguments are just old-wives tales without substance and proof and having no bearing on
the question of the validity or power of the Instrument of Accession.
8/12/2005 6:33 PM
In many ways the Instrument of Accession is like a Sale deed, excepting that there is no
consideration, and the peaceful transfer of title of a sovereign land changes hands from
one legal entity to another. The terms that govern the transference are fully incorporated in
the standardised document format, a format itself which was deemed acceptable and
admissible as being constitutionally valid and administered to the several hundred like
parties across the sub-continent on like terms and conditions.
Such a legal arrangement between two sovereign entities, cannot be considered null or
void by any third party and is binding on all people, external and internal to the matter to
respect it and be bound by the validity of it, let alone provide scope for any third party to
Bhaskar even question it. In the case of a dispute regarding the terms of the document, either of the
affected parties had a clearly defined legal recourse spelt out in the document itself.

Now given all this India has an ironclad case on Kashmir's accession to India.
This in itself is indisputable.

Now what legal document does Pakistan have to claim accession of Kashmir?

8/12/2005 6:43 PM
If india Had this document,and they think its legal and valid
then please tell me who took this matter to UN for discussion and resolution...?

The Instrument of Accession has never been under dispute. That is the reason that India
never calls Kashmir a 'disputed territory'. Indai took the matter to the UN in the last week of
December 1947, merely to highlight the fact that an act of aggression had taken place by
another country on its sovereign territory and to ask the UN to intercede to ensure that the
other country withdraw its troops from within India's borders.
India did not go to the UN asking them to settle any 'dispute' as your textbooks would have
Bhaskar you believe. To understand this, you need to read the complete Indian submission on the
subject before the UN, which was part of Menon's speech along with copies of all relevant
annexures/documents and placed before the UN in the mid-1950s.

Do you have the official Pakistani submission on the matter before the UN as stated by
Zafarullah Khan the Paki representative to the UN? If so kindly provide the link to that and
that would make interresting reading, though Menon's speech addresses some of the
points made in Zafarullah Khan's speech.
8/12/2005 8:45 PM
<<< Crabby by imputing a fraud, a criminal act, on India in this matter, you again
repeatedly demonstrate that you cannot desist from getting crappy. Maybe it is the result of
your commie rural education that has resulted in providing you with such an impoversihed
Sandy moral outlook. But that is you.>>>

dear mods, can this kind of enlightening arguments be discouraged?
8/12/2005 9:13 PM
??

K-boy Lets get to back playing which religion I brand u again....
8/12/2005 11:23 PM
can this kind of enlightening arguments be discouraged?

Tainting a country and implying that it perpetrates fraud without any basis, is enlightening
Bhaskar argument for you, is it eh?
8/13/2005 12:57 AM
dear mods, can this kind of enlightening arguments be discouraged?

Exactly for this reason I refrain from joining this discussion. Snobs has a good friendly
Asif environment. We should maintain that.
8/13/2005 1:02 AM
Snobs has a good friendly environment.

Yes. It also has a reputation for intellectual honesty which a few of us are trying to uphold.
Bhaskar In any case I always see the losers of any argument ending up whining and hijacking the

5.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

thread by any means mostly foul.
8/13/2005 2:08 AM
Exactly for this reason I refrain from joining this discussion.
Snobs was made for that reason (discussion), i think.

K-boy Snobs has a good friendly environment. We should maintain that.
agreed! but i can sacrifice this for a good discussion
8/13/2005 3:50 AM
Instrument of Accession has always been disputed By Pakistan.

and Kashmir is an acknowledged Disputed Territory. [ ..like Crabby earlier posted Nehru's
speeches and telegrams etc , indicate this dispute is acknowledged by the Indians too]

Aquaris Its unresolved so far, and 58 Years of dispute after independece has hammered a few
dents here and there , none the less its a disputed territory..

CIA 's prepared Maps of Disputed Areas of Kashmir
8/13/2005 5:44 AM
Instrument of Accession has always been disputed By Pakistan.

Why and on what basis?
Bhaskar Do you have the official Pakistani position regarding this?
Zafarullah Khan's speech in 1957 to the UN may help for instance.
8/13/2005 8:07 AM
Yes that would be an interesting READ..

So far i could not locate the exact Text
Aquaris anywhere on the Net...except opinions on it.

8/13/2005 9:25 AM
So What is your argument?
There are several things that you need to grapple with here to remove the cobwebs that
cloud your understanding.

Yes ofcourse,there are several confusion here regarding that precious document of yours
which you want to prove as some universal truth which is not...

and you have to deal with cobweb when you are defending something which I think is
either a lie, or a something not signed under free will...

1. It is perfectly OK for one to sign a standard document and send it across for signing to
the other party. This could well have been done and it is entirely possible that the Maharaja
had the standard signed document with him, given to him in advance so he peruse it and
make up his mind and call and confirm to Delhi when he was willing to sign it so it could
personally collected by the representative of the Govt of India.

If that be the case (which btw is officially denied by Indian Govt who still maintains that the
Unknown king signed it in presence of Mountbatten)...then Indian troops should go to Kashmir after
the document is recieved in Delhi right...now how fast was the mail delivery system in 1947
that Delhi got the document overnight? Simple question that you are avoiding...the
chronology of events suggest that Indian troops were deployed first then the precious
document came in which case the whole involvement of India in kashmir is illegal...

The domestic disturbances and eventual Indian intervention left no option for Maharaja Hari
Singh but to appeal to India for assistance. The Maharaja signed on October 26, 1947 an
Instrument of Accession the legality of which is questionable. Several facts lead to the
conclusion that the Maharaja was forced to sign the Instrument of Accession through
coercion and fraud.

http://securefrontiers.com/index.php?articleID=736&sectionID=1
8/13/2005 9:26 AM
Reference

Alastair Lamb, 'Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1946-1990' (Hertferdshire:Roseford, 1991) p.
107. Alastair Lamb, 'Incomplete Partition: The Genesis of the Kashmir Dispute 1947-1948'

5.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Unknown Op. Cit.]
8/13/2005 9:31 AM
2. The place is mentioned in the document, only so it records the jurisdiction of the court
when an agreement comes under dispute. In this case the recourse to the dispute is
mentioned in the Instrument of Accession itself, so no place need be mentioned.

Who says there is no dispute, because you say so? Indian Govt says that the thing was
signed by the king in Mountbatten's presence,but they cant prove it...so how can they say
this?

3. The date of signing is relevant only if on the said date both signatories do not have the
Unknown powers to sign the document as representatives of their respective sovereign entities. That
was not the case here.

Yes...but as I mentioned earlier...legally India can interven only after the document is
signed by the king on his free will...so TIME is important...you are assuming things which
you cant prove dude...
8/13/2005 9:37 AM
4. Thus from the above, it is perfectly legal and not incongrous, if the Maharaja had signed
the available document with him on the 26th and even if Menon had landed on the 27th to
collect it. The document is still valid.

Actually nothing is legal unless you prove here the sequence of the event...you are just
putting forward some tall claims without proving them...

5. Even if the document had been had been dated the 27th, which it is not, and the Indian
troops had landed in Srinagar on the 27th, nothing takes away the merit of the document.

Now, you are showing nothing but your intellectual dishonesty...so you are saying that its
OK for Indian troops to intervene even without getting approval from the king?

6. It mus tbe known, that around 550 principalities/kingdoms signed in on the Instrument of
Unknown Accession and it is entirely likely that the original drafts were all dated for the month of
August 1947. The fact that it was struck out and corrected lends validity to the Document in
question.

Please show me the scanned copies of those Instruments of Accessions for all other
states..

PS:You repeatedly accuse me of using biased sources, now I am using pro-Kashmiri sites
and some books/articles by Western authors whereas all you have is documents from
Indian Govt...and we all know where does India stand in the list of Most Corrupt Countries
dont we...
8/13/2005 9:41 AM
which btw is officially denied by Indian Govt who still maintains that the king signed it in
presence of Mountbatten.

Bhaskar Authentic source please.
8/13/2005 9:43 AM
.then Indian troops should go to Kashmir after the document is recieved in Delhi right..

Wrong. Wrong assumption.
Bhaskar
8/13/2005 9:45 AM
ok you describe the chronology of events according to you first...

Unknown
8/13/2005 9:45 AM
the chronology of events suggest that Indian troops were deployed first

How is that suggested.
Bhaskar

5.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

then the precious document came in which case the whole involvement of India in kashmir
is illegal...

How does it become illegal. What act makes it illegal?
8/13/2005 9:48 AM
becasue its stating someting to be done infutre which is already done in the past...

Unknown
8/13/2005 9:48 AM
The Maharaja signed on October 26, 1947 an Instrument of Accession the legality of which
is questionable. Several facts lead to the conclusion that the Maharaja was forced to sign
the Instrument of Accession through coercion and fraud.
Bhaskar
No substance. Old wives tales. No evidence of coercion or fraud.

already given the refernce 8/13/2005 9:51 AM
Reference

Alastair Lamb, 'Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1946-1990' (Hertferdshire:Roseford, 1991) p.
107. Alastair Lamb, 'Incomplete Partition: The Genesis of the Kashmir Dispute 1947-1948'
Unknown Op. Cit.]
8/13/2005 9:52 AM
[The place is mentioned in the document, only so it records the jurisdiction of the court
when an agreement comes under dispute. In this case the recourse to the dispute is
mentioned in the Instrument of Accession itself, so no place need be mentioned.]

Bhaskar Who says there is no dispute

Did you first understand what I have written to which you have replied?
8/13/2005 9:56 AM
[The date of signing is relevant only if on the said date both signatories do not have the
powers to sign the document as representatives of their respective sovereign entities. That
was not the case here.]

Yes...but as I mentioned earlier...legally India can interven only after the document is
signed by the king on his free will...so TIME is important...

Bhaskar Wrong. This entire drama regarding the date is regarding coercion and that is what you
have to establish without a doubt.

Nothing that you have said so far violates the authenticity of the document.
You have suggested fraud of course but have not backed it up.
8/13/2005 9:58 AM
thats the dispute you want me to make, not the dispute I want you to reply to....which you
are avoiding again and again...anyways,I got this article which quotes directly from Lamb's
book that I referred earlier...if you do not believe read the paper copy of the book itself..

'Whatever the difference of opinion between Nehru and Patel might have been, they
did not surface to any significant degree at the morning meeting of the Defense
Committee on 26 October. Here it was agreed that it would be best if the Maharaja of
Kashmir's signature to an Instrument of Accession be obtained before the Indian
Unknown troops went in to Srinagar airfield. As such a signature had not been obtained, and
was unlikely to be obtained, on 26 October, it would be expedient to create a set of
circumstances, which made it look as if it had been obtained, a kind of document
laundering…. Both the white paper and V. P. Menon's narrative have served to back
up this ruse'.
8/13/2005 10:00 AM
[Thus from the above, it is perfectly legal and not incongrous, if the Maharaja had signed
the available document with him on the 26th and even if Menon had landed on the 27th to
collect it. The document is still valid.]

Bhaskar Actually nothing is legal unless you prove here the sequence of the event..

5.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Actually the sequence doesn't matter unless you are trying to prove fraud or coercion
somehow in which case it could probably form the basis of your new conspiracy theory
depending on how you
want to swing it.
8/13/2005 10:03 AM
[Even if the document had been had been dated the 27th, which it is not, and the Indian
troops had landed in Srinagar on the 27th, nothing takes away the merit of the document.]

Now, you are showing nothing but your intellectual dishonesty...so you are saying that its
OK for Indian troops to intervene even without getting approval from the king?
Bhaskar
There is nothing wrong if the entire act is consensual and the acts are simultaneously
performed. The only argument that you can possibly have is coercion and you will you have
to PROVE coercion without a shadow of a doubt.
another source 8/13/2005 10:03 AM
from the same article...it quotes from the book Nehru: A Tryst with Destiny by Stanley
Wolpert on page 416 and 417

In Nehru: a Tryst with Destiny, on pages 416 and 417 Wolpert relates the story of the
signing of the Instrument of Accession. The Instrument of Accession, according to
Wolpert, was only signed by Maharaja Sir Harri Singh after the Indian troops had
assumed control of the Jammu and Kashmir State's summer capital, Srinagar. On
Unknown the basis of the above references it can safely be held that there has been no
instrument of accession ever executed by the ruler of the State in favour of India.
The document, on the face of it, is based on forgery and fraud. In other words, the
said document does not exist in the eyes of International law.
8/13/2005 10:07 AM
[It mus tbe known, that around 550 principalities/kingdoms signed in on the Instrument of
Accession and it is entirely likely that the original drafts were all dated for the month of
August 1947. The fact that it was struck out and corrected lends validity to the Document in
question.]

Please show me the scanned copies of those Instruments of Accessions for all other
Bhaskar states..

It is you who has to prove fraud and coercion and not me. You are the one accusatory
here. So prove your case.
8/13/2005 10:09 AM
I have already said I dont believe in that fraud document unless I can see that all the
documents are like that I'll maintain my stand on this issue...anyways you havent yet given
me your version ofthe chronology of events...

Unknown
8/13/2005 10:10 AM
ok you describe the chronology of events according to you first...

The chronology of events in this case regarding the signing of the IoA, be it 26th or 27th,
doesn't matter the least, according to me, if you have to prove fraud and coercion.
Bhaskar
Those are your allegations anyway, so prove it.

8/13/2005 10:14 AM
becasue its stating someting to be done infutre which is already done in the past...

You still have to say why and how the IoA is illegal. You will have to elaborate, draw up a
Bhaskar sequence of events, offer proof and THEN state that it is illegal as a conclusion. I'm
waiting.
so... 8/13/2005 10:15 AM
according to you if Inian army lands in Srinagar and then king signs the agreement its
same as first signing the agreement and then sending the troops?

Care to expalin whats the point of signing the IoA if troops are already there? If this is not
Unknown coercion then what is?Or is your definition of coercion different from mine?

5.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/13/2005 10:16 AM
Reference

Alastair Lamb, 'Kashmir: A Disputed Legacy 1946-1990'

Bhaskar Lamb wrote a story book on what he thought happened. We are not discussing his book
and his book is hardly evidence.
8/13/2005 10:20 AM
'Whatever the difference of opinion between Nehru and Patel might have been, they did not
surface to any significant degree at the morning meeting of the Defense Committee on 26
October....
Bhaskar
Mere conjecture by Lamb. Doesn't mean the IoA is a fraud or was obtained using coercion.
8/13/2005 10:22 AM
story book with evidence is perfectly valid in the court of law...

Unknown
8/13/2005 10:25 AM
from the same article...it quotes from the book Nehru: A Tryst with Destiny by Stanley
Wolpert on page 416 and 417

Bhaskar None of them say how it is a forgery and a fraud or had been obtained by coercion let
alone going about proving it. We are not discussing storybooks here anyway.
8/13/2005 10:29 AM
have you read any of them?
anyways...as I said, you ask Indian Govt to chellenge this on International Court, and then
lets see how they prove that the document was signed before sending the troops...but if
you think thats also legal then I see no point in arguing with you...
Unknown
8/13/2005 10:32 AM
I have already said I dont believe in that fraud document

This is an official document of the Indian govt. If you accuse it to be a fraud document,
Bhaskar prove it. Else retract your statement if you can't.
8/13/2005 10:37 AM
according to you if Inian army lands in Srinagar and then king signs the agreement its
same as first signing the agreement and then sending the troops?

If you are trying to prove coercion, could you tell me how all this becomes coercion even if
Bhaskar the document is dated the 27th, which it is not.
You could begin by telling what you understand to be coercion and how the act of troops
landing in the Srinagar airport on the 27th amounts to coercion.
8/13/2005 10:38 AM
with evidence is perfectly valid

Yeah. Where is the evidence. You haven't shown me any so far.
Bhaskar

8/13/2005 10:39 AM
I think it already explained in the last article I posted...troops were already there so, the
king had only two options - either to perish at the hands of tribals, or join India by signing
the document...this by no means represnt his free will...it was a situation exploited by
India...and the king fell for it...is it clear now how coercion was used...had the Indian Govt
Unknown been so honest why did they send the troops before getting king's approval?
8/13/2005 10:42 AM
you ask Indian Govt to chellenge this on International Court

Why should the Indian Govt prove anything to anybody regarding one of its official
Bhaskar documents. Incidentally no official body has ever questioned the authenticity of the IoA.
Not even Pakistan in its several representations to the UN.

5.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/13/2005 10:45 AM
the king had only two options

Wrong assumptions again. Countries that gets attacked by another country seldom thinks
Bhaskar of accession to a third country.
8/13/2005 10:48 AM
oh really, why did he flee then?why did he not stay there and fought with the tribals with
whatever royai army he had?

Unknown
8/13/2005 10:50 AM
oh really, why did he flee then?why did he not stay there and fought with the tribals with
whatever royai army he had?

Bhaskar Where did he flee, did he flee Kashmir?
8/13/2005 10:54 AM
we come back to the same issue...where did he sign the document?

Unknown
8/13/2005 10:56 AM
we come back to the same issue...where did he sign the document

It is a non-issue unless you prove coercion and somehow weave it into your plot and back
Bhaskar it up with irrefutable proof. No story book material and old wives tales.
8/13/2005 11:08 AM
may be a non-issue to you...but unless you are proving where it was signed my (Lamb's)
theories are equally valied...I ahve asked you again and again what according to you was
the chronology of events?

Unknown
8/13/2005 11:28 AM
India is the one holding an official document between itself and another sovereign entity.
Both are sovereign entities and their representaitves were equipped to sign on their behalf.
It is a valid legal constitutional document. I've already explained to you that it is not a
requirement to mention the place where the agreement was signed and specifically gave
you the reasons in this case.

You are the one hurling defamatory and slandering accusations like fake, forgery, fraud
and coercion, when it comes to an official document of India which no sovereign body has
Bhaskar so far disputed regarding its authenticity.

So provide the evidence to back up your evidence or retract your allegations on the ground
that you are unable to substantiate them and that they are unfounded and baseless.

That is all there is to say on the matter, unless you dish out the proof or the retraction first.
8/13/2005 11:30 AM
But looks like you are only interested in showing the document, and not dealing with the
history how it came...just one suggestion for your mental satisfaction...take a print-out, and
then put it on a frame, and hang it in your bed room so that every morning you wake up you
can see it and shout "kashmir is mine, kashmir is mine"...
Unknown Just a friendly suggestion...

8/13/2005 11:32 AM
You are the one alleging that the official document of India is a fraud/forgery and/or has
been obtained through coercion.

So provide the proof to back up your slandering allegations or else retract your allegations
Bhaskar and own up that what you said had no substance that could be proved.

That is all there is to say on the matter.

5.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/13/2005 11:38 AM
if a lie is posted 5 times, it still remains a lie...

I can only prove when you give me your version of the history how the document came into
existence which you are not giving...
Unknown
8/13/2005 11:44 AM
India is the one holding an official document between itself and another sovereign entity.

If this another sovereign entity is represented by a king, he loses his authority as soon as
he flees his territory to go and sign the document...hence at the time of signing he CAN
Unknown NOT REPRESENT THE SOVEREIGN ENTITY....
8/13/2005 11:44 AM
I see that your statements were empty of reasoning all along and that you are unable to
provide any proof unsurprisingly to back up any of your wildly imaginative allegations.
I guess this ends the discussion with you.
Bhaskar
8/13/2005 11:48 AM
he loses his authority as soon as he flees his territory

Back-up what you say.
Who says he fled his kingdom? And when did the Maharaja lose his authority over his
Bhaskar kingdom?

You are clearly hallucinating. I have no more time to waste on you.
8/13/2005 11:49 AM
But your lies still remain as lies....
you can not conclusively prove that the IoA was signed by the king on his free will at the
time when he was truly representing Jammu and Kashmir, and then only Indian troops
intervened....I ahve given refernces,you dont want to believe in them...fine go ahead and
Unknown live in your fool's paradise...
8/13/2005 12:04 PM
NO will is ever free...

India may not have even looked at having nuclear weapons if Pak and China were not its
K-boy neighbors
8/13/2005 12:05 PM
ok K-Boy, can u tell me where was the IoA signed?

after that I'll post another article which has excerpt from lamb's book...
Unknown
an article that has excerpt from Lamb's book 8/13/2005 12:11 PM
India maintains that this period of independence, the existence of which it has never
challenged effectively, came to an end on 26/27 October as the result of two pairs of
closely related transactions, which we must now examine. They are:

(a) an Instrument of Accession of Jammu and Kashmir to India which the Maharajah is
alleged to have signed on 26 October 1947, and;

(b) the acceptance of this Instrument by the Governor-General of India, Lord Mountbatten,
on 27 October 1947; plus

(c) a letter from the Maharajah to Lord Mountbatten, dated 26 October 1947, in which
Indian military aid is sought in return for accession to India (on terms stated in an allegedly
enclosed Instrument) and the appointment of Sheikh Abdullah to head an Interim
Unknown
Government of the State; and

(d) a letter from Lord Mountbatten to the Maharajah, dated 27 October 1947,
acknowledging the above and noting that, once the affairs of the State have been settled
and law and order is restored, “the question of the State’s accession should be settled by a
reference to the people.”

In both pairs of documents it will be noted that the date of the communication from the
Maharajah, be it the alleged Instrument of Accession or the letter to Lord Mountbatten, is

5.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

given as 26 October 1947, that is to say before the Indian troops actually began overtly to
intervene in the State’s affairs on the morning of 27 October 1947. It has been said that
Lord Mountbatten insisted on the Maharajah’s signature as a precondition for his approval
of Indian intervention in the affairs of what would otherwise be an independent State.
8/13/2005 12:13 PM
The date, 26 October 1947, has hitherto been accepted as true by virtually all
observers, be they sympathetic or hostile to the Indian case. It is to be found in an
official communication by Lord Mountbatten, as Governor General of Pakistan, on 1
November 1947; and it is repeated in the White paper on Jammu and Kashmir which
the Government of India laid before the Indian Parliament in March 1948. Pakistani
diplomats have never challenged it. Recent research, however, has demonstrated
beyond a shadow of a doubt that the date is false. This fact emerges from the
archives, and it is also quite clear from such sources as the memoirs of the Prime
Minister of Jammu and Kashmir at the time, Mehr Chand Mahajan, and the recently
Unknown published correspondence of Jawaharlal Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister.
Circumstantial accounts of the events of 26 October 1947, notably that of V.P Menon
(in his The Integration of the Indian States, London 1965), who said he was actually
present when the Maharajah signed, are simply not true.

The whole article

8/13/2005 12:25 PM
What recent research? has shown that the date is false?

The author also claims "Circumstantial accounts of the events of 26 October 1947, notably
that of V.P Menon (in his The Integration of the Indian States, London 1965), who said he
was actually present when the Maharajah signed, are simply not true."

And why the hell would i believe that what this lamb person is saying will be true? Waht
circumstantial accounts.
K-boy
AFA i see, the problem u have is that the troops moved into Kashmir on 27th, whereas the
IoA was "formally" signed on 26th. SO what?

can u tell me where was the IoA signed?
I do not know where it was signed. But then, neither can u. You are just cut-n-pasting a
lamb
Was waiting for this! 8/13/2005 12:30 PM
The date, 26 October 1947, has hitherto been accepted as true by virtually all observers,
be they sympathetic or hostile to the Indian case. It is to be found in an official
communication by Lord Mountbatten, as Governor General of Pakistan, on 1 November
1947; and it is repeated in the White paper on Jammu and Kashmir which the Government
of India laid before the Indian Parliament in March 1948. Pakistani diplomats have never
challenged it.

They had no reason to challenge it, be they sympathetic or hostile, and saying the GOI
perpetrated a fraud without proof destroys complete credibility of the author.

-----------------------------------------
Recent research, however, has demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt that the date is
false.
Bhaskar
Very ambiguous statement.
--------------------------------------

This fact emerges from the archives, and it is also quite clear from such sources as the
memoirs of the Prime Minister of Jammu and Kashmir at the time, Mehr Chand Mahajan,
and the recently published correspondence of Jawaharlal Nehru, the Indian Prime Minister.
Circumstantial accounts of the events of 26 October 1947, notably that of V.P Menon (in
his The Integration of the Indian States, London 1965), who said he was actually present
when the Maharajah signed, are simply not true.

References to more story books and more old wives tales, but proof none whatsoever! That
is Dr Lamb for you. A good story teller, who sold his book.

5.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

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

There's proof now for me and others to understand the way commies read,
understand and write history! LOL

---------------------------------------
8/13/2005 12:35 PM
Jammu to Srinagar is like 150 odd kms. that shouldnt take the whle day of 26th Oct
anyway...

K-boy Please note that i do not have knowledge of where the IoA was signed, but will not accept
these fairy tales you call history. I am debating what u call evidence.
8/13/2005 1:44 PM
have u read the article...they havent said that Maharaja took 1 day to travel from Srinagar
to Jammu...his prime minister who was negotiating in delhi, reached Jammu on 27th of
October,so he got the document on 27th of October...but in the scanned copy the date is
written as 26th of October!!!!
Unknown
8/13/2005 1:50 PM
AFA i see, the problem u have is that the troops moved into Kashmir on 27th, whereas the
IoA was "formally" signed on 26th. SO what?

u got the whole thing wrong...troops moved in on 27th in the morning, whereas the
document got signed on 27th in the afternoon (26th is false date)....they are deliberately
Unknown
trying to prove that 'past' was actually 'future'...
8/13/2005 1:58 PM
The scanned thing is not opening...so read a legible version from Idian Embassy's official
website here...

http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/kashmiraccession.htm

"Given under my hand this 26th day of October, nineteen hundred and forty-seven."

Hari Singh,
Unknown Maharajadhiraj of Jammu and Kashmir State.

This whole thing is challemged by lamb's theory with evidences...some of who are people
that he talked to...they might have died...
8/13/2005 5:48 PM
As far as I am concerned, one sovereign nation asking another sovereign nation to help
defend it from attack is a perfectly valid thing. "Coercion" happened if Indian troops landed
in Srinagar without an invitation, which in some way forced the King to sing the IoA. Which
Mahim even this Lamb fellow seems to agree did not happen. The only "coercion" I see happening
here is the Pakistani invasion of Kashmir.
8/13/2005 5:49 PM
Also, yo, Crabby, Jammu is part of "Jammu and Kashmir", see? Stop flogging the "fled"
bullshit.

Mahim
8/13/2005 9:55 PM
Why is CRabby suggesting that August 27th came before August 26th in 1947?

BR

5.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Mahim 8/14/2005 7:47 AM
"Coercion" happened if Indian troops landed in Srinagar without an invitation, which in
some way forced the King to sing the IoA.

Plz read the article and lamb's book...thats precisely the arguement he made...Indian
troops landed in Srinagar in the morning of 27th October, whereas the king got to see the
IoA in the afternoon of 27th October...(although the IoA says its given to the king on 26th
Unknown
October which is not possible as proved by Lamb)....so now you agree that coercion was
there?rather duress as Lamb called it...

8/14/2005 10:31 AM
Exactly for this reason I refrain from joining this discussion.
Snobs was made for that reason (discussion), i think.

Discussion, not argument. This kind of arguments and name calling and emotional diatribes
are happening plenty elsewhere.

Snobs has a good friendly environment. We should maintain that.
Asif agreed! but i can sacrifice this for a good discussion

I am only repeating the policy employed by the Indian Government. They want CBMs, they
want trade, and improvement of bilateral relations on all issues, but they don't want to
address the core issue of kashmir because it is intractable. Why get into a discussion when
we know the only outcome will be bad temper.
8/14/2005 10:50 AM
Why not an argument? whats wrong? Name calling is bad. But I am all for debates/
argument (and rational ones at that, not crappy tales).

Agreed, the stance of Indian Govt is to solve things by mutual discussion. But it would be
useless to discuss the Karnataka-TN water issue with Pakistan. Simlarly, no need to talk
K-boy Kashmir with Musharraff. CBM's is fine though, if u want to talk abt them that is.. but then
time and again, after a round of talks we have a mjor infiltration.... hence i believe there is
not much use talking too.. whatsay?
8/14/2005 12:43 PM
Indian troops landed in Srinagar in the morning of 27th October, whereas the king got to
see the IoA in the afternoon of 27th October

IoA or no IoA, it is still not "coercion" if the King asked the Indian troops in before he had
actually signed the piece of paper. Does your precious Lamb claim anything to that effect?
Mahim
I maintain that the only coercion in this instance was from Pakistan's side, who launched an
invasion of the state thus forcing the King's hand.
8/14/2005 1:44 PM
Plz do read the last article before commenting, or else everytime u'll come with another
new confusion...was the king in Delhi to negotiate with Govt of India...No...it was his prime
minister...who came back to Jammu on 27th only...so how did the king get the IoA on
26th?
Unknown
8/14/2005 2:07 PM
LOL

indian memebers of this community are stil in a state of denial..
Aquaris Bottom line is Kashmir is a problem, a dispute acknowledged by all , and to be sorted out
by the parties involved....!!
Dodgy arguments without merit again. 8/14/2005 2:52 PM
1. If the PM of Kashmir was in Delhi to negotiate, and if YOU say that the signing of the IoA
was an outcome of negotiation then there could have been NO COERCION as per your
own logic. So we can rule out COERCION from the discussion from now on.

2. The author just says that the Prime Minister was in Delhi to negotiate. The subject of
Bhaskar 'negotiation' is a surmise. It could have well been a meeting and it could have been well to
do with matters affecting Kashmir as a result of invasion by Pakistan, possible help that
could be provided on this front and on essential services and trade as Pakistan had cut off
essential supplies to Kashmir in the earlier weeks or it could simply be to discuss the

5.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

standstill agreement for essential services that needed to be signed but was becoming
increasingly irrelevant given the invasion by Pakistan.

What leads anyone to believe that it was about the IoA? More so because it was a
standard document signed by all the Princes/Kings and any changes would cause inequity
and unfairness and dispute with regards to others. This becomes all the more apparent that
it was a standard document from the scan where the name of the principality/kingdom and
the ruler gets filled in. Thus since it was a standard document that needed to be signed by
the king in any case, there was no room for negotiation on that front.
So Lamb linking two unrelated activities - a meeting and the signing of the IoA, to build a
story is very good for a storybook but does not prove anything.

I've yet to see any proof for the following allegations:

1. Coercion
2. Fraud
3. Forgery
4. Any sovereign body/UN disputing its authenticity when it came for discussion in the 40s
and 50s.

Nobody needs to read any storybook here. Kindly present the proof that substantiates the
allegations.
8/14/2005 3:12 PM
Bottom line is Kashmir is a problem,....

..and Pak has no effing business there.
K-boy
8/14/2005 6:27 PM
@Crabby: "as proved by Lamb"
Everybody agrees on this? What did the guy prove?

Maybe the correct words are
assumed, conjectured, theorised, thought, written, proposed,... etc.

When you are trying to support a particular point of view, assuming that it is already true
and talking on that basis is IMO stupid.

BR
8/15/2005 12:04 AM
. If the PM of Kashmir was in Delhi to negotiate, and if YOU say that the signing of the IoA
was an outcome of negotiation then there could have been NO COERCION as per your
own logic. So we can rule out COERCION from the discussion from now on.

Nevr said that the PM signed the IoA....he had no authority to sign...he just brought it back
Unknown
to the king who did not know what was going on between the PM and Govt of India....
8/15/2005 12:08 AM
2. The author just says that the Prime Minister was in Delhi to negotiate. The subject of
'negotiation' is a surmise. It could have well been a meeting and it could have been well to
do with matters affecting Kashmir as a result of invasion by Pakistan, possible help that
could be provided on this front and on essential services and trade as Pakistan had cut off
essential supplies to Kashmir in the earlier weeks or it could simply be to discuss the
standstill agreement for essential services that needed to be signed but was becoming
increasingly irrelevant given the invasion by Pakistan.
Unknown
Whatever the subject of negotiation might be...bottomline is that the PM had no authority to
sign...so no matter how Govt of India brainwash him,he could do nothing without consulting
the king which he did the following day (27th)ndian troops were already airlifted in
Kashmir...the wrong date of 26th was still written in the IoA,courtsey GoI...

8/15/2005 12:17 AM
1. Coercion

You send the troops first, then king had no choice other than signing it...
2. Fraud
Unknown 3. Forgery

5.20
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Wrong date, it should be 27th and not 26th of October..

4. Any sovereign body/UN disputing its authenticity when it came for discussion in the 40s
and 50s.

oh, plz tell me when was it produced to any sovereign body/UN?Was it produced in
October 1947, or much latter...gimme the date plz...
BR 8/15/2005 12:18 AM
agreed...but on the other hand Govt of India cant conclusively disprove Lamb either...

Unknown
8/15/2005 12:19 AM
btw, Happy Independence Day to you Bhaskar...

Unknown
8/15/2005 1:11 AM
[. If the PM of Kashmir was in Delhi to negotiate, and if YOU say that the signing of the IoA
was an outcome of negotiation then there could have been NO COERCION as per your
own logic. So we can rule out COERCION from the discussion from now on.]

Nevr said that the PM signed the IoA....he had no authority to sign...he just brought it back
to the king who did not know what was going on between the PM and Govt of India....
Bhaskar
1. You didn't understand my point, so read it again. If there was negotiation that was
carried out then there was NO coercion.

2. You claim he brought it back. Prove it.
8/15/2005 1:14 AM
Whatever the subject of negotiation might be

You are the one who is assuming that he went to Delhi for a negotiation. My point is that he
Bhaskar could have just attended a meeting with an entirely different agenda. I'm questioning your
assumption here. What is the basis to support it?
8/15/2005 1:17 AM
1. Coercion

You send the troops first, then king had no choice other than signing it...

Wrong. Countries send troops to other countries on request, verbal or otherwise depending
Bhaskar on urgency all the time. When doing so they don't stipulate that the country accede as a
pre-condition. So you've got to prove what you say.
Besides you speak consistently of negotiation about IoA in your arguments. Negotiation
rules out coercion. So your arguments are internally inconsistent.
8/15/2005 1:19 AM
Wrong date, it should be 27th and not 26th of October..

1. You have not proved why it is wrong.

Bhaskar 2. Besides the date itself does not mean anything in this context, let alone prove that the
document is not authentic.
8/15/2005 1:21 AM
but on the other hand Govt of India cant conclusively disprove Lamb either...

The person casting allegations and aspersions has to prove what they say.
Bhaskar That is not being done here.
It is insane to expect any reasonable person to require to disprove storybooks.

5.21
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/15/2005 1:28 AM
The onus is on lamb to prove it. He cannot merely say whatever he wants on the basis of
what he thinks. There should be solid proof when he says that the instrument of accession
wasn't signed on August 26th.

To answer a conjecture with several conjectures,
How will a person with Lord Mountbatten's integrity and legal acumen send soldiers to
Kashmir without the document? Granted he was closer to Nehru, but he was still a subject
of the British Crown. His role in this affair would've been widely condemned in Britain if he
had done any mischief regarding the instrument of accession.

The control of the Indian army was in the hands of British officers and they would not have
agreed for the military action if the basis of those actions were fradulent.

BR And finally, it was Pakistan which violated the stand-still agreement with Kashmir. So, their
position that the Maharaja was not the soveriegn over the state of Kashmir becomes
untenable as they were the ones who were trying to illegally remove him. In no way does
this dilute his authority to sign the document as he continued to be the King of the
Kashmiris- of the whole state of Kashmir as it was on August 15th 1947.
8/15/2005 1:31 AM
correction october 26th.

BR

8/15/2005 2:03 AM
1. You didn't understand my point, so read it again. If there was negotiation that was
carried out then there was NO coercion.

You didnt even try to understand mine....negotiation was with the prime minister...king had
no clue...and as mentioned in Lamb's book Indian Govt just wanted to convey their decison
to the PM...it was a negoitiation, but both parties were not having same power...PM was
carryng just the document that king will see and will have to sign as troops are already
there...so coercion is still valid..
Unknown
2. You claim he brought it back. Prove it.

I cant awake the dead men to prove it...i have given a credible refernce, read it...
8/15/2005 2:04 AM
You are the one who is assuming that he went to Delhi for a negotiation. My point is that he
could have just attended a meeting with an entirely different agenda. I'm questioning your
assumption here. What is the basis to support it?

Unknown Oh really..what different agenda?to ahve some gossip with Nehru and Patel?
8/15/2005 2:06 AM
1. You have not proved why it is wrong.

Already said that Lamb spoke to people who knew details of Menon,the prime minister and
the king...he just did not come up with this theory out of the blue...

2. Besides the date itself does not mean anything in this context, let alone prove that the
document is not authentic.
Unknown
Oh really...if any info in the document is a lie then it can make the whole document a fraud
FYI...

5.22
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

BTW 8/15/2005 2:07 AM
I havent got the answer from you yet - Why did Govt of India suppress this document for so
many years?Why did they not show it right then?

Unknown
nitpicking 8/15/2005 2:27 AM
Already said that Lamb spoke to people who knew details of Menon,the prime minister and
the king...he just did not come up with this theory out of the blue...

K-boy such profound belief!! i dont believe in self that much
8/15/2005 3:54 AM
I have answered all your questions at least a couple of times with explanations. You either
don't bother to read what others have written and understand them or are naturally dense.
Having said that, you stick to Lamb's story with such passion that it would make the Marxist
followers blush. By sticking to it and not offering evidences and proof when asked at least
half a dozen times only indicates you deepset prejudices and bias and of course
Bhaskar insecurities arising out of ignorance.

It's a waste of time discussing anything with you as many here have often remarked.
Thanks for the entertainment though.
Finally 8/15/2005 5:31 AM
1. The same website that hosts the scan of the Instrument of Accession also states that the
Maharaja requested for help on Oct 24, 1947.
So Lamb's date of Oct 26, 1947 is planted to give a twist to the tale.

Bhaskar 2. It also reaffirms that the authority of Maharaja Hari Singh to enter into an Agreement is
not questioned by Pakistan.
As usual 8/15/2005 10:59 AM
You are deliberately avoiding the last question I asked...why did India delay so much to
show that precious document?
WHY WHY WHY?

1. The same website that hosts the scan of the Instrument of Accession also states that the
Maharaja requested for help on Oct 24, 1947.
So Lamb's date of Oct 26, 1947 is planted to give a twist to the tale.

Yes,it said that Maharaja asked for help on 24th, but against who?Those who revolted on
24th of October were Kashmiri Muslims only who were opposing the Hindu ruler...can you
prove that Pakistani army was involved?Let me remind you that India and Pakistan signed
a non-intervention treaty on Kashmir unless its attacked/pressurized by eithe country...so
that 24th of October problem was entirely Kashmir's internal problem in which India was
Unknown
bound by the agreement not to intervene...

It also reaffirms that the authority of Maharaja Hari Singh to enter into an Agreement is not
questioned by Pakistan.

It might not be...but legally India could only help had he proved that Pakistani army is
invading Kashmir which was not quite obvious that time...how did India know that the
attackers were Kashmiri tribals or Pak army?They automatically assumed that it was Pak
army, and baited the king by sending the troops first...the king just fell for it...
k-boy 8/15/2005 3:58 PM
hence i believe there is not much use talking too.. whatsay?

Exactly that.

Asif There really is no use talking about those issues which we know we cannot resolve by
talking.
8/15/2005 4:42 PM
Its not because we (Ind and Pak) CANT resolve the issues that I said theres no use talking
to u, its because you are not supposed to poke ur nose...
K-boy

5.23
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/15/2005 7:34 PM
crabby, I'm not sure why you believe a novel over signed and documented evidence which
everyone accepts as true. May be you don't want to believe that India was legally correct
during 1947. Maybe you will believe every conspiracy theory against India howsoever
grandoise and untruthful it is. Anyway, your points seem to change everytime one answers
the original points and then they also totally seem to be based on conjectures.
You are basically arguing because you want to argue. And to top that,obviously, you want
to defame India using any means possible. Lamb's book is only a pretense. Sorry for
thinking that you have sense.

BR
8/15/2005 8:36 PM
I cant accept a lie in the name of patriotism/nationalism whatever...

Unknown
8/15/2005 9:59 PM
I cant accept a lie in the name of patriotism/nationalism whatever...

That's very noble. India is lucky to have people like you. Try harder, you can be next
gandhiji.

Baldev
Superb - Kashmir the Bone of Contention 8/16/2005 12:24 AM
Man invented Beer so the Irish could'nt rule the world....The English, it seems, invented
Kashmir so the subcontinent could'nt rule the world. Talking about History, we lived with
normal peace (which includes time to time bickering over land by maharajahs and co.) until
the white man stepped on the coasts. We keep talking about "conspiracy theories", how
Ahwar about we stop inventing theories of what was and try and feed the millions of hungry
mouths we already have in undisputed areas instead of fighting over those in Kashmir and
what not. How many of us have ever BEEN to Kashmir by the way?
8/16/2005 12:24 AM
I have ... and came back alive.

K-boy
8/16/2005 2:53 AM
@k-boy:-and came back alive-
Without that confirmation, I would've thought I am speaking to a bhoot

BR
8/16/2005 1:51 PM
To those who wanted my attention in this thread : since the three moderators haven't been
able to go through the thread properly or hold a meeting as yet, and won't be able to do so
for some more time, I, on behalf of them, shall have to delay any action out here.

However, be warned that Snooty's patience has ebbed and she does not refrain from
Snootylicious taking tough actions these days - irrespective of the reputation of the poster.

love,
Snooty.
8/16/2005 2:03 PM
Snooty is angreeeee

K-boy

5.24
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

8/16/2005 3:33 PM
Snooty is angreeeee

And needlessly so, IMHO. There have been sharp words, but nothing that warrants "strong
Mahim action".
8/16/2005 4:27 PM
Mods or Gods, the more patient, the better.

K-boy

8/16/2005 4:31 PM
^
God-fearing atheist?

Unknown
8/16/2005 6:50 PM
WTF, Im in US now,

In God we (better) trust!
K-boy
8/16/2005 10:26 PM
how can a peice of paper signed by one person who had inherited the throne of kashmir ,
decide the fate of 85 % of the population.

thats why pakistan doesnt accept that peice of paper.

Junaid Noor bhaskar as a citizen of the biggest democracy of the world you should be the last to
believe in such papers.

what if pakistan gets to sign a similar paper signed by the CM of kashmir?
8/16/2005 10:35 PM
how can a peice of paper signed by one person who had inherited the throne of kashmir ,
decide the fate of 85 % of the population.

More than half of muslims decided to stay in india at the time of partition, but jinnah did it.
Musharaf is ruling pakistan, he is taking decision for pakistan, isn't he? How is he different
than kashmir's maharaja.
Baldev

Democracy is over-hyped.
8/16/2005 11:28 PM
how can a peice of paper signed by one person who had inherited the throne of kashmir ,
decide the fate of 85 % of the population.

You are incorrect. They decided the fate of 100% of the population. That is why they were
called princes/kings. And it was legal and constitutionally valid. That is how 550
principalities signed into India and so did quite a few in Pakistan like Bahawalpur and
Baluchistan.
This was the agreed arrangement between all parties, the British, the Indian and Paki
politcal leadership as well as the princes/kings.
Too bad people do not understand and accept legal documents for what they are.

thats why pakistan doesnt accept that peice of paper.
Bhaskar
Again incorrect. Pakistan never ever questioned the authority of the Maharaja of Kashmir
or the document that he signed, when the matters were discussed at the UN.

bhaskar as a citizen of the biggest democracy of the world you should be the last to
believe in such papers.

It is because I live in a democracy that I appreciate the value of legal procedures and the
rule of the law, and them being more powerful and morally right than the rule of the sword.

5.25
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

what if pakistan gets to sign a similar paper signed by the CM of kashmir?

You need to learn a lot about constitutional validity of a document, and a great deal about
your own history regarding the background work that took place in getting the formalities
ready for the kingdoms/principalities to accede to India/Pakistan.
Bhaskar 8/16/2005 11:33 PM
Didnt get answer of the last question...how was Govt of India so sure that the invaders
were Pakistani army before sending the troops!!!!Remember India was bound by law not to
intervene in Kashmir....some oracle told them it was Pakistani army that invaded?
Unknown
8/17/2005 2:42 AM
Yes it were the Mashid Qabials that nearly over ran Kashmir, and One of their major
grieviences against the govt of Pakistan is that it did not helped them at that time,
Otherwise they would have Over ran every thing in Kashimir.
Aquaris and these People from the Tribal Areas are still as independent and feirce as ever ,
remember what happening in WANA,
Crabby 8/17/2005 5:24 AM
Yes it were the Mashid Qabials that nearly over ran Kashmir, and One of their major
grieviences against the govt of Pakistan is that it did not helped them at that time,
Otherwise they would have Over ran every thing in Kashimir.

and these People from the Tribal Areas are still as independent and feirce as ever ,
remember what happening in WANA,

This is what a Paki has replied. The whole world kows that it was Pakistan that invaded
Kashmir, yet you are the only one who seems to be deluded by the fact. I did not mention
anywhere that the Paki army invaded Kashmir in Sep-Oct 1947, nor did India believe so.

You are plain inellectually dishonest and I have no intention of taking this further. You just
prove this in thread after thread and there are a number of people in this very thread who
Bhaskar have pointed out that, as they have earlier.

You don't have an argument to put forth your case and don't read the answers given by the
others. All your questions have answered many times over only if you care to read. You
are willing to trash an official scanned document of the government of India but are willing
to live in a world of your own conjectures. Thankfully most of us don't need to live in such a
state of psychosis.
This is getting repetitive and boring now, though it was quite funny reading to your so
predictable arguments in the beginning. Thanks for the entertainment anyway.
I think it is time to close the thread unless somebody else has something noteworthy to say
on the topic.
8/17/2005 6:59 AM
"The whole world kows that it was Pakistan that invaded Kashmir,"

..... In the same way , you are bragging about the validity of that Instrument of accession,
which is an established dispute, and yet you insist on denying that, ...can you prove
that...??.NO not from the anti-Pakistan sites , But from any Objective source
Aquaris No you won't be able to do that...because
Pakistan never invaded Kashmir , They along with India had an agreement on that with the
Maharaja of Kashmir. and its in the history books that those Invading tribes waited and
waited and waited for Pakistni army's re-informent , which never came.....
8/17/2005 7:09 AM
Kashmir has no future happening.
It cannot be solved without eradicating the basic cause: RELIGIOUS BLINDNESS &
RACISM.

Racists and fundamentalists arrange logic which favours and satisfies their side, though
they know they are in the wrong side.
Sudipta
Stop harping on the same string.

Crabby...... I think you can never make a colourful exhibition of paintings in a province of

5.26
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

blinds.

8/17/2005 9:22 AM
The whole world kows that it was Pakistan that invaded Kashmir, yet you are the only one
who seems to be deluded by the fact

Whole world knew!!!!How?
Some oracle happened?Thatswhat I asked?
Unknown
and trust me I am not the only one, there are thousands of international organizations, and
Kashmiri expatriates who do not buy this lie that you wanna sell...
8/17/2005 1:38 PM
Crabby...... I think you can never make a colourful exhibition of paintings in a province of
blinds.

K-boy u mean Crabby is painting coulours and not putting facts? u speaking for Crabby or
against?
@ Crabby 8/17/2005 1:39 PM
It certainly wasnt evident, that Pak would invade Kashmir. India anticipated Austrailia to
take over Kashmir because its PM had a headache at that time. Any problems?
K-boy
@trust 8/17/2005 1:41 PM
thats one thing i dont wanna do Crabby, esp not when u are around.

K-boy
8/18/2005 11:15 PM
Guess what guys?
Crabby based on the arguments put up in this thread has been referencing this thread in
other communities, asserting that the Instrument of Accession is a lie.
Bhaskar What a laugh! And he's a snob!
8/19/2005 12:08 AM
Bhaskar!

You are a snob too. As much as comments like this and this say about that.
Ayesha
You dont like Crabby's arguments, attack those, but refrain from attacking crabby.
Ayesha 8/19/2005 12:53 AM
You miss the point completely.

Nobody likes dodgy arguments and intellectually dishonest arguments which may take
several forms right from outright lies, deceit, or refusing to answer questions, furnish proof,
substantiate what one says with credible back up, undermining credible sources for no
reason, propping up sources of questionable credibility, deliberate misrepresentation,
exaggeration, selective representation with mal-intent, .....

Believe me there is no way you can discuss let alone argue out your points, with such
'arguments' ... Ridicule is often the only recourse available, though you are welcome to
Bhaskar
demonstrate alternative handling to our better enlightenment in the face of such activity.

This is nothing personal, but when this is repeatedly done as pointed out by several others
earlier and through several threads through their comments and in this thread too, it
definitely calls into question the 'snob' aspect.
I've no problem with the fact mind you that he's 'your' snob, but that doesn't prevent me
from pointing it out.
8/19/2005 1:20 AM
The mods are impartial. This is all that I will say on this issue for the time being.

Ayesha
8/19/2005 1:30 AM
on behalf of all snobs, i thank the mods for the same.

5.27
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

K-boy
8/19/2005 6:09 AM
Bhaskar:<Maybe it is the result of your commie rural education that has resulted in
providing you with such an impoversihed moral outlook. But that is you.>

Bhaskar, kindly follow Ayesha's advice of staying away from personal attacks. If you are
sure that your points and arguments speak for themselves, I think that even you would
agree that they wouldn't need the additional sugar coating of cheap name calling and ad
hominems to sound more credible.

I am sure that with the wonderful open minded urban education that you got inside that
sprawling BHU campus (man, I loved playing cricket there on sundays! :p), you can figure
Manuel মানুেয়ল out yourself alternative ways of dealing with situations that peeve you out. Just make sure
that it conforms to the general spirit of this community, a community that amongst other
things has the word 'FRIENDSHIP' in its name.

Please don't test the patience of the mods from here on. We mods understand and
appreciate that an occasional fight/flare is inevitable, but we dont appreciate sentences
like the ones pasted above. Besides, our patience runs quite thin these days, and our
behaviour has turned quite fancifully. Recall Moosa and his 'Ardyments' fate.

8/19/2005 7:05 AM
In the same breath Crabby should also keep in mind that well researched and sound
arguments always merit a clean and more constructive discussion. Argumentation for the
sake of argumentation is not appreciated and does not help maintain community standards.
Ayesha
Please be mindful.
8/19/2005 7:49 AM
ok...

Unknown
8/19/2005 8:22 AM
btw Bhaskar one thing you said is right...both in India and USA I studied in rural
universities...

But whats commie education in Science?Do you think Comies change the Newton's
Unknown Laws?
8/19/2005 11:01 PM
apparently the Third law would be in serious danger
I wonder if we will ever have anything close to 'gaussian distribution' if it came to stats...
K-boy
8/19/2005 11:02 PM
Actually the Third Law is taught by Narendra Modi these days...

Unknown
Manuel, Bhaskar 8/20/2005 11:47 AM
I am sure that with the wonderful open minded urban education that you got inside that
sprawling BHU campusp

Mahim eh? when? where?
8/20/2005 11:23 PM
Crabby,

Brilliant!
K-boy

5.28
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

United Nations
http://www.orkut.com/Community.aspx?cmm=4608

http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=2421503538591385811&start=59&na=3&nid=4608-
2421503538591385811-2427019101234224082

Topic: Brazil in security council, do you agree?

Brazil in security council, do you agree? 9/24/2005 10:20 PM
Do you agree with the entenring of Brazil in the permanent security council?

MY opinion: I do not and agree. Brazil has no political conditions to enter, because the
politicians here are elected by manipulation of the mass. I agree because we have
capacity of stabilish peace in the countries that are afflicted with civil war and etc. Eg: Haiti
Luiz
Eduardo Show your opinions please, better if you are not from Brazil.
9/25/2005 12:19 AM
look for old threads

(procure topicos antigos sobre o assunto)
Hugo
9/25/2005 12:46 AM
Yes, not only Brazil but also India. And both should have veto power.

Silent
9/25/2005 3:49 AM
why not ?
brazil has shown that is capable to take his place on security council!
but it doesn't interest G8 , becuase it'd be like some kind of " little country" trying to be
William important enough !
Brazil having a permanent seat but not veto power 9/25/2005 9:55 AM
In my opinion, due to the fact that there is no permanent representation from the central
and south american block in the security council, it is important to allow a permanent seat
from this block. Brazil, being the largest in size and thus beaing able to represent a larger
part of the block should have the chance of having a permanent seat. However, i believe
that Brazil should not be given the veto power due to corruption in the veto power system.
I believe that veto power allows countries to manipulate the outcomes of world politics (ex:
Ayna US and USSR during the cold war. They used the veto power more than 70 times during
this period)
9/25/2005 1:15 PM
Permanent seat without veto power is useless.

Henrique
9/25/2005 1:49 PM
Yes for Brazil and no for India.

Qaiser
9/25/2005 6:58 PM
I support Brazilian membership in UNSC, even if it is very unlikely to happen.

Any reform should be made toward the opening of UNSC to "the rest of the world", the
90% out North America and Europe. So, I am not sympathetic at all to Germany in the
UNSC.

I am excited with the possibility of a seat to Africa. In any case, the new members must
Clara have veto power, or it won’t be real.

6.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

"mass" 9/25/2005 7:07 PM
the politicians here are elected by manipulation of the mass

Elections in Brazil aren´t much different from elections in the most "civilized" European
Countries. You are misinformed about the World around.

Mass = them / Citizens = us ??

Clara Where are you getting such concepts from?
Mass?!?! It sounds so late XIX century...
9/25/2005 7:25 PM
bush did it!
but hey, let's not start old threads again. Seriously, before posting anything read the
shitload of posts on this matter.
Hugo

BLEH! 9/25/2005 8:46 PM
India? Come on... u gotta be kidding me! :) I support Brazil, this country deserves such a
place in there! So many time waiting for this, even it will be so difficult to happen; but it's
not imposible
Patrícia
Clara 9/25/2005 9:28 PM
Elections in Brazil aren´t much different from elections in the most "civilized"
European Countries. You are misinformed about the World around.

Mass = them / Citizens = us ??

Where are you getting such concepts from?
Mass?!?! It sounds so late XIX century...

When i refer of manipulating the populational mass (speaking of Brazil, this means
the majority of the people, the poor ones) All of us are citizens, of course, but i use
to separate the people that has some sense in voting that the people that are
manipulated.I did not get why you put "civilized" i did not said that whe aren't
Luiz civilized, what i mean that the eleet of the country manupulates the majority. You
Eduardo know that is true, if you ever knew about the partiality of the brazilian media, that
influees in the decision of the people, also the votes that are bought by politicians.
Come on, see our political situation right now, you 'll understand.

Com'on guys, lets try not use the comon sense to say the opinion, with not India?
Affirm with strong arguments, not only because you are brazilian.
9/26/2005 5:47 AM
so, you say that that only happens in brazil... Well, i guess then that the chineese people
choose very well their leaders and americans vote on republicans because they are good
people.
=D
Hugo
9/26/2005 5:52 AM
No, Not Brazil.

Aazur
9/26/2005 7:52 AM
you say that that only happens in brazil

Did i? I also agrees that the american people are quite manipulated, BUT. They fight when
the politicians do not do what they said would do.

6.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Luiz
Eduardo
what ? 9/26/2005 9:10 PM
do this guy really thinks us politics r well structured n democracticaly elected?
people who fight against the policy of us government r simply ignored.. as we saw
yesterday in washington.
and more.. they just don't influence in the us decisions in the unsc.
and.. elections in us r much more unfair than it is in brazil.. just give a look at the way it
happens.
Rafael and finishing.. does this guy thinks george bush can take better decisions in unsc than lula
for example ??
us have a crazy president and it is enough to prove that even brazil, even with all
corruption, is more indicated to take such important decisions as the ones taken in tha sc.
true.. 9/26/2005 9:15 PM
to say the true..
unsc is a completely coward and unfair organism.
it simply doesn't make sense..
and goes against all un principles.
Rafael it's like a world oligopoly of politics
No 9/26/2005 10:51 PM
As Brazil is a puppet of america and in security council it will definitely protect the interests
of America and will do nothing any more there...

We need a nation with his own ideas and moral values....
Munir
9/27/2005 2:22 AM
every 1 shud b in UNSC

Mutawassa
m
Rafael 9/27/2005 11:15 AM
When you say: this guy . Who are you refering to?

Luiz
Eduardo

@ Luiz 9/27/2005 6:48 PM
Europeans, Americans and citizens from anywhere do not fight every time their
government does something they disapprove.

Most British are against the war on Iraq. Blair openly said he would not raise the tuition fee
for Universities. He entered the war, raised the fees and still he got reelected.

Does that mean UK is now a Banana Republic? No!!! It is just another example that
decision making (from Norway to Pakistan) is complex…

Your arguments against Brazilian pledge to UNSC lack consistence and democratic
Clara principles. There is virtually no chance Brazil will have a seat and veto power but for
another reasons: simply because it isn’t strong enough (politically and economically).
Besides, the pledge doesn’t have full support of the entire sub-continent. Argentina, for
instance, is very skeptical.

6.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@ Luiz, again 9/27/2005 6:51 PM
Poorer (or less instructed) people are not necessarily more naive or easy to manipulate.
Each and every person is subjected to influences on their decision-making, but the process
is far subtler then you believe. Maybe that is why we can’t always see the same happening
to us.

Frankly, what you wrote is so elitist that is revolting…

Sorry if I sound too rough on you. You are so young!!! I can’t expect you to know much
Clara about international politics. I truly hope however that you will realize how deeply elitist your
line of thinking is...
@ Hugo 9/27/2005 7:01 PM
You are right: people should look into older discussion before opening a new topic. I found
it necessary to answer the thread though because its contend is against the basic
humanist principles which UN is suppose to stand for.

politicians here are elected by manipulation of the mass.

When i refer of manipulating the populational mass (speaking of Brazil, this means the
majority of the people, the poor ones)

It is clear that the author think of the poor ones in a very derogatory way. If I take that post
Clara radically I would have to come to the conclusion that certain people (here, the poor ones)
should not have full political rights.

It is scaring to see a young boy writing such thread.
9/27/2005 9:26 PM
You just said something i am not. I do not like elitism. I want to take as so impartial and
skeptic. =/ , So i am here to take back everything i said, by the way was missunderstood or
badly expressed by me.

I used the term mass, because it is very used along the world. My definition of populational
mass was wrong, now i can correct: The populational mass is the portion of the people that
are manipulated. Some parts of middle class here in Brazil can be inside this concept.
Of course that are exceptions.

It is clear that the author think of the poor ones in a very derogatory way. If I take that post
radically I would have to come to the conclusion that certain people (here, the poor ones)
Luiz should not have full political rights.
Eduardo
That is your conclusion, i do not think of pople like you said, i shown that to people see
what happens, and that this situation (of manipulation) be reverted.

Sorry again for the missunderstooding (i confess that i can not be real cleary writing in
english like i do in portuguese) and not looked to the old threads.
The point i wanted to get was that in Brazil (now i know that is not only here) people should
defend the objectives of the mass, and fight for it.
10/1/2005 5:17 PM
munir, why do you think brazil is a puppet from US?
The dictatorial regime, no doubt it was, but you can't say that about lula and the majority of
the brazilian population.
Geez, he even made deals with china that weren't that profitable so that the the two
countries get closer diplomatically... His administration promoted the mercosul more than
ever against the FTAA and he diplomatically invested deeply in every country that he
Hugo could, that was situated on south or central america...
Of course he does not represent the whole line of thought of us brazilians, but we
nowadays tend to stand more neutral in these international disputes...
10/7/2005 1:30 PM
I think that Brazil needs to be more like an Switzerland, neutral, but without lack of militar
power, otherwise other countries wouldn't respect us. In WWII, the war that involved all
continents (not sure), the Swiss could stand neutral in front of Hitler and Churchill.That's
good in my point of view

Luiz

6.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Eduardo
Luiz 10/7/2005 2:24 PM
Does Brazil have nuclear ambitions?

Qaiser
10/7/2005 3:13 PM
No expension in UNSC.

Kashif
10/7/2005 6:19 PM
qaiser, no, brazil has no nuclear ambitions. There is one(and only one) extreme right party
in here that tries to get elected by saying they will build the nukes, but we consider them to
be ridiculous. Their candidate for president used to use a beard like some arabs keep and
to yell very loud after everything he'd say, MY NAME IS ENEIAS. Really, that was comic...
Even the dictatorial regime was not really ambitious towards nukes... At least not officially
and if they were unoficially, they hid it very VERY well. The last war brazil was really
Hugo engaged was against paraguay, in the 18th century... Our diplomacy works very well and
we tend to avoid conflicts.

Neutrality is dumb. We should stick to one side and make allies.
10/7/2005 7:11 PM
I think brazil does deserve to be in the security council as the most deserving country in
south america but it needs to make its presence felt on the internatinal arena

Vaibhav

10/8/2005 1:15 PM
Any country except India is acceptable to me. I have a feeling that most of the Brazilian
people are accommodating and judicious.

Syed
10/8/2005 4:05 PM
accomodating and judicious?
you mean brazilian people are lazy and judge people?

Hugo
10/8/2005 8:07 PM
I think Brazil has conditions to have veto power. I think there should be one or two
countries from each continent with veto power. Brazil is a good option, but Brazilian
diplomacy must be prepared to face other countries´hard opinions and influence.

Uesley
10/9/2005 4:08 AM
Accommodating = willing to adjust actions in response to the needs of others

helpful obliging cooperative compliant accepting

Judicious = showing wisdom, good sense, or discretion, often with the underlying aim of
avoiding trouble or waste

Syed sensible well thought-out well judged careful cautious thoughtful shrewd astute prudent
wise

6.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Courtesy Microsoft word.
Qaiser. 10/9/2005 5:44 AM
Brazil doesnt have nuclear ambitions. Once a candidate to presidence used to say that
brazil should construct the atomic bomb: People used to consider him simply
RIDICULOUS.
Our society had been under a militar dictatorship before. I think thats why our people hate
so much militarism. Brazil has been against the invasion of Iraq, and this year we will vote
if we aproove or not the comercialization of guns for civil people.
That's why i think that it would make more sense if Brazil was on ONU than other countries
Regina (i mean, countries that support wars).
Thanks, Hugo 10/9/2005 5:47 AM
i replyied the topic without reading your post before.

Regina
Ah, by the way.... 10/9/2005 5:50 AM
I think the dictator government had nuclear ambitions, Hugo (but i cant tell for sure, of
course, because if they did, they did it hiddenly). If not, why did they construct Angra 1 and
Angra 2? The project of nuclear energy is very close of the project of nuclear power.

Regina
for sure 10/9/2005 8:08 AM
Brazil should have the veto power just cuz we're the gr8test, the biggest, the richest and
trhe best country in South America...we have to have it...

who in SA deserve more than us...argentina? aehieuhaeuahieaheihiuu
Igor
c'mon...no one...
10/9/2005 1:48 PM
ow, sorry for the misunderstanding, but this anti brazil movement on orkut really made me
paranoid

they were too close of it and too dependant on US govt to do it... I think they were using the
structure to one day break ties with them and build the nukes... But they did not...
Hugo
Why?? 10/9/2005 6:49 PM
I think it is not so important to Brazil. Maybe it will be a source of trouble.
By the way, the UNSC is becoming useless. The real "security council" is the USA. Just
look the irak war...

Fabiano

10/9/2005 10:08 PM
political tools are never useless my friend. If you are against, and brazilian, don't get in the
way of the external recognision of ur own country.

Hugo
10/9/2005 10:46 PM
Luiz, let's wait until Israel gets a permnent SC seat with a a veto, and then Brazil can have
one.
James
10/9/2005 11:03 PM
whenever israel gets that seat muslim countries will abandon it. It wouldn't be united
nations. It would be United states and western states political tool.

Hugo

6.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Brazil 10/10/2005 5:35 AM
Brazil is an economic powerhouse, and anyone who doesn't think so knows nothing of
macroeconomics. Look at what happened when Brazil had problems with IMF payments in
the 80s and 90s, and look at the amount of foreign investment in not just Brazil, but the rest
of South America. I won't bore you all with rankings in diverse industries but, on a global
scale, Brazil is up there in many of the most significant industries.

As for foreign policy, Brazil has a historic reputation of judiciously using its judgement in
international affairs, and this must continue. Any move to neuter it by becoming a
Switzerland-clone (which, by the way, is historically neutral so as not to affect its principle
industries) would be detrimental and a waste of excellent resources and potential. Brazil's
works abroads do not get international (or even internally national) recognition by the
media, but they are actively participating in Haiti, Angola and Mozambique, and
participated (token effort, but at least they did something) in the former Yugoslavia.

Len As for nuclear ambitions, Brazil has had a nascent nuclear power aspiration since the
1970s which has succeeded in lighting a torch. There is an excellent case for this
technology to be expanded given the alternatives and their consequences (look at the
environmental impact of Itaipu). As for militaristic ambitions, Brazil has been pursuing a
programme for a nuclear submarine for decades and, publically at least, have acheived a
working reactor system. However, there is much else to achieve, such as the
superstructure of a submarine, the support and logistics needed by a nuclear boat
programme and the extensive training needed to crew those vessels. Meanwhile, Brazil
has a not informidable military (despite what the majority of civilians in the country might
think), with a capable Navy (verging on blue water), a relatively modern Air Force and a
capable Army which is world recognised in jungle and urban warfare.
continuing... 10/10/2005 5:43 AM
The UN security council urgently needs restructuring to represent the majority of the
international communities. The present 5 permanent members (as everyone knows) were
chosen from the principle victors of WWII. The present international situation requires
representation from a wider audience, and South America cannot be ignored. Brazil is
economically, militarily and preceptually the strongest country in the region. International
recognition would only strengthen it as well as supporting a better self image that its people
need.

As for the fool who reckons that Brazil is a US puppet, I suggest you stop watching Fox
and reading old copies of Pravda. The recent shafting of the US by the WTO, exemplified
by the Brazilian-led direction of the WTO to irradicante subsidies, is only one such
Len indicator. The socialist government has not held back the punches, and has slapped many
who predicted doom and gloom with free-market bordering policies. There can be no doubt
that the President (and his economic advisors) have come round to the idea that to have a
more equal country, there is first a need for a stable economy. He might pay for some of
the harsh realities of his projects at the next general election, but after almost 50 years of
walking around with their eyes shut, it is time that the "haves" in Brazil admitted that they
screwed up by not doing enough in the past. But that is another topic for conversation.
10/10/2005 6:02 AM
How many border disputes Brazil has with its neighbours? How many independent regions
have acceded to Brazil after its independence? Which country is the biggest enemy of your
land? About UNSC I agree with Fabiano

Syed
History 10/10/2005 6:03 AM
On a point of history, Brazil (rather neglectedly) did sent forces into Italy at the closing
stages of WWII as well as the peacekeeping forces mentioned before. They also provided
many of the hospital ships in the South Atlantic during the WWII.

Unfortunately, the hangover from the military dictatorship in Brazil during the 60s, 70s and
early 80s means that their military is often seen as the poor relative by both the
Len government and the people.

But bellicosity does not make a country more UNSC-able.

6.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Syad 10/10/2005 6:05 AM
Why does that matter? It is warmongerers like you that have led to the majority of military
disputes over the last 50 years. Just because a country has managed to live in peace with
its neighbours is not evident of weakness. Open your eyes.

BTW, I won't be drawn into comment on other countries membership in this thread.
Len
UNSC 10/10/2005 6:14 AM
As for the strength or weakness of the UNSC, yes the US (and don't forget the UK)
trampled all over the UNSC for the Gulf War. But what is to be done now? Cry over how
bad things are, or try to do something about it and strengthen the only international
organsation that might help?

Without doubt the UN screwed up by not sanctioning the US. If they had, it would have
been interesting to see the US reaction - either ignore it or withdraw. Ignore, they already
did. Withdraw? Even the US couldn't fight everyone at the same time, despite the thinkings
of some of its current administration. Kofi Annan should have denounced the actions at the
Len time or negotiated for a delay. Once the reality of the falsehoods on which basis the war
was fought were exposed, he should have denounced the actions out of hand and
absolutely. The UNSC allowed themselves to be bullied for the sake of influence and
money. A pity that politics takes the higher priority over the longer term best for the
international community.
@Len 10/10/2005 9:39 AM
It is warmonger like you that have led to the majority of military disputes over the last 50
years.

We have borders with Iran, Afghanistan, China, and India earlier, until Bangladesh was our
part, we had borders with Myanmar (Burma) also. We went to war with how many of these
countries? Why is it that we have abnormal relations with only one country and have
friendly with all the rest?

India claims that Kashmir acceded to it. Goa, Sikkim, Bhutan voluntarily joined the Indian
union. Why it is that Republic of Sanmrino and Vatican although these countries are land
locked, do not voluntarily join the Italian republic. Bangladesh once a part of Pakistan
separated and became independent. Do we have bad relations with that country? Does
each one of us in Pakistan keep claiming that we have same culture hence should become
one? Indians because of their religion always are convincing us that we should become a
part of Akhand Bharat.

Please correct your record and upgrade your knowledge and read the following carefully.
Syed The Jihad and religious feelings were promoted in Pakistan and funded by Saudi Arabia
and Shah of Iran for many years with the willingness and criminal support of the Europe
and US. The purpose was to get rid of the USSR. The terrorism is the fallout of that policy
of US and Europe.

You forgot to call us terrorist. There have been, for over a decade, hundreds of suicide
bombings against different sects. Just concentrate for a moment and ponder that there has
never been any sectarian clash within these sects any where in our country. We different
sects in Pakistan live in harmony that is for sure. I claim that all the sectarian targets have
been by some outside source. Try and just kill one holy cow in India and imagine how
many people will be killed in sectarian clashes; it will be evident that people in India don’t
live in sectarian harmony take examples of Bombay and Gujarat.

Contimued…. 10/10/2005 10:02 AM
Is it warmongering to expect from the aspirant of the UN permanent seat if it has any bad
relations with its neighbours? Is it warmongering to ask the aspirant of the UN permanent
seat if it had ever forced any of its neighbours to accede to Brazil? I asked the questions
because I fear another aspirant our neighbour India has evil designs against us.

Lastly, there are scores and scores of UN resolutions on Kashmir and Palestine pending
application, will Brazil consider forcing governments of India, Pakistan, Israel, and relevant
Arab countries for their implementation. If the resolutions in east Timor, Iraq, and
Syed Afghanistan can be self implementing why these cant be in case of Kashmir and Palestine.
At the very outset when I joined the topic I said I am for Brazil and not for India.

If the situation is not going to change for us then good! you can also join the tea party at

6.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

the UN. If the situation is not going to change for me and I am thrown out of the discussion
then what does it matter who takes the Permanent seat at the UN? Just be impartial and
please go through the UN resolutions on Kashmir.

While I write this half of my country bleeds and many are dead. Please pray for the victims
of the earthquake in northern Pakistan and Kashmir. Thanks.
Missed point 10/10/2005 10:32 AM
I wasn't describing any country as a warmonger - I was assigning that moniker to you
personally. As I said, I won't be drawn into a discussion of other countries within this
thread. I restrict my comments to justification for Brazil's membership of the UNSC.

On that subject, the fact the Brazil is not in dispute with a neighbour or at war with anyone
would, in the mind of most right thinking people, be a good reason for putting it in the
Len UNSC.

If you want to drone on about other countries, I suggest you join or start another thread.
10/10/2005 10:57 AM
Thank you for being considerate.
What I mentioned above are my considerations to judge the ability of an aspirant member
who will bring justice to me and all the Kashmiris and Palestinians. it is a humanitarian
problem and needs some ones to attend to. We have been the victims of the attitude of the
permanent members and the veto power for the last 60 years. It is very cruel of you to just
brush aside our miseries. How long do you think that these problems should remain
unresolved? Just look at the UN record to find out how many vetoes have been there
Syed against us and what has been the out come of those actions.

Just say that Brazil wants permanent membership for fun only and that we have to live
forever without Justice I will quit and let you make the fun.
no really ! 10/22/2005 11:08 AM
Brazil have to thinking about anothers questions!

Vasco
10/22/2005 11:17 PM
My dear friends,

Please, don´t be that naive!

The veto power is such an ilusion!!! UNFORTUNALTEY!!!!

Otherwise US wouldn´t have entered Iraque, once France was against it since the begining
but even tough the super mega blaster powerful USA did whatever they wanted to, or Bush
wanted to, so what difference do you think Brazil or India would make in the CS ???

Dalila I´m not saying I don´t agree with their enterence I just UNFORTUNATELY don´t have
hopes that it would change or that it would work!!!!

Nevertheless even not working the veto power is good to have one or two of us (growing
country) there in the permanent seat, yes!!!
@Len 10/23/2005 4:13 AM
Look, every country is having some were the other competitors. Specially their neighbours.
For example China wouldn't want Japan to go to Security Council. Similarly Italy and Spain
are trying hard to stop Germany from entering United Nations Security Council.

Same is the case with Brazil, Argentina and Chile are vehemently opposing Brazil's entry
in UNSC.

Prashant In India's case it's only one Pakistan. These countries don't have any reason for why their
countries should be let into Security Council, but they only have reasons why they are
neighbouring country should not be let into Security Council.

Neither of the countries can gather enough support to make sure their own
candidatureship.

6.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

The only reason, Mr Syed could provide was that since India is having problems with
Pakistan, it should not be let into Security Council.

Anyways, like many Brazilian members on this forum are asking questions like why India
should be let into Security Council, even people here in India ask the same question that
why Brazil should be let into Security Council?

Except for the fact that Brazil is a very progressive economy, what are the other reasons
why Brazil should be let into Security Council?
10/23/2005 10:47 AM
because brazil has a peaceful history... Despite having territorial issues we were able to
solve them without imperialism or cohersion(uruguay used to be a brazilian state, which
now is independant and we have extremely good relations with them), we are the strongest
echonomy in south america and we ought to represent our continent, which is indeed
forgotten in the world's political scenario, we are the most active and traditional diplomatic
Hugo voice in here and we have intentions on representing the developing countries in general.
But heh, seems like coffe club is too fancy for us.
@Prashant 10/23/2005 2:19 PM
The only reason, Mr Syed could provide was that since India is having problems with
Pakistan, it should not be let into Security Council.

If my previous posts have brought the above message it seems that I have not expressed
myself properly. What I said was: I will prefer Brazil to India because I think the people of
Brazil are judicious and broad minded compared to Indian people.

Brazil has less border and other types of disputes with its neighbours. Brazil has not forced
its smaller neighbours into accession. And has never shown to be on the path of
hegemony and brought into the folds of its domain. While India has forced Bhutan, Sikkim,
Kashmir and Goa into accession. In India have disputes with all its neighbours.

Resolution adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January 1957,
concerning the India–Pakistan Question states:
Syed http://daccess-
ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?Open&DS=S/RES/122%20(1957)&Lang=E&Area=RESOLUTI
ON

Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and
impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,
Continued……. 10/23/2005 2:22 PM
Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have taken
or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire
State or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such
action by the Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in
accordance with the above principles;

India stands in violation of the above resolution; the above clearly states that the final
settlement of the Kashmir is by a plebiscite under UN supervision only. And that if India
Syed affiliates the state of Jammu and Kashmir it will stand in violation of the above resolution.
There have been scores of resolutions passed with over whelming majority by different UN
forums on Kashmir and vetoed by USSR in support of India.

Why should I support a country to judge a case when it stands accused of violating the
principles of the court itself? I hope I have made my point now.
10/23/2005 7:30 PM
Brazil has less border and other types of disputes with its neighbours. Brazil has not forced
its smaller neighbours into accession. And has never shown to be on the path of

6.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Prashant hegemony and brought into the folds of its domain. While India has forced Bhutan, Sikkim,
Kashmir and Goa into accession. In India have disputes with all its neighbours.
Well you are talking for your national interests, you may not find Indian people judicious
and broad minded, and you may find Brazilian people more of that kind. Its same as
America prefers India over Brazil because they think that Brazil is more left oriented. All the
facts here speaking are biased. Otherwise you can't give me name of a single country
except for Pakistan which is having these kinds of problems with India.

We were having border problems with China (because of Chinese invasion in 1952) but we
are solving them. Bhutan was never acceded to India.

India stands in violation of the above resolution;
India stands in violation of the above resolution because this resolution violates its
constitution. India's first leader took this matter into UN, and at the time Indian democracy
was immature, that is the reason his decisions were unilateral.
But now Indian democracy is quite mature and people take decisions on their own. No
government can afford to go against people's decision. We are more than one billion, and
to maintain a democracy are successfully working democracy of one billion is not as small
task, for example our own neighbour Pakistan is half the time having military rule.

10/24/2005 1:54 AM
You are one billion and you can grab the land of your adjoining countries or disputed
territories and have the right to violate the UN resolutions. Very fine logic but I fail to
understand it; don’t you think you are proving my point? We are justified to mistrust your
people, and to fear them.

You accept that you have border dispute with china; fine that’s what my point was. Your
Prime Minister Mr. Rajive Gandhi was killed by a suicide bomber from Sri Lanka. Why?
What is the level of cordiality between your country and Bangladesh?

We never elected any military dictator they come on their own and stay there with the
Syed blessings of the so called democracies, super powers, and permanent members as long as
they suit them and fulfill their international political designs.

We wish a nation of judicious people to be on our side to fight for the poor and weak
people of this world. I know, though, in the international politics a single judicious nation is
not enough; but at least it gives me hope that they will be sympathetic to our cause.
10/24/2005 11:19 AM
You accept that you have border dispute with china; fine that’s what my point was.
We have border disputes with China because we had a war with them.

And after the war both the sides claimed areas on their own. China claims Arunachal
Pradesh to be theirs, and India claims the pre-1962 territory to the ours.

Your Prime Minister Mr. Rajive Gandhi was killed by a suicide bomber from Sri Lanka.
Why?
Rajeev Gandhi was killed by a Tamil suicide bomber, because he authorised Indian
peacekeeping forces to Sri Lanka. Now Don't say a word more about Sri Lanka if you don't
know anything about it.

What is the level of cordiality between your country and Bangladesh?
Prashant I guess the main reason of discontent from Indian side is the refugees from Bangladesh.
There are no border disputes, no wars, no other problems between India and Bangladesh.

We wish a nation of judicious people to be on our side to fight for the poor and weak
people of this world.
Surprisingly, whether there were UN resolutions on Kashmir issue, for the world it doesn't
matters.

Terrorism is the new buzzword, and you if support it then he had to carryits burden.
you cannot opt for both the things,international support and your stupid terrorism cum
Jihad cum political movement.

6.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/24/2005 11:23 AM
What about Saudi Arabia, does anyone here know about its position concerning the UN
Reform????

Dalila
10/24/2005 12:07 PM
prashant, brazil had a war with paraguay because they invaded us first. We have no such
things as unsolved border disputes. Our diplomacy has a tradition on working VERY
WELL. Look for 'Barão do Rio Branco'. But as i said, i think coffee club is considered too
fancy for us third world countries. As if there weren't enough violence and similar problems
as ours in the US... It's merely an act of non sharing power, in my view...
Hugo
10/24/2005 12:12 PM
is it my impression or you guys don´t talk to women here????

Dalila
10/24/2005 12:33 PM
actually i prefer to read than to write
i answer things i know...
read the thread carefully and you'll see that there were woman active in this peculiar
debate. I don't even think your question was fair...
Hugo
Yeah !!! 10/24/2005 2:06 PM
I strongly agree!!!

Beto

10/24/2005 3:47 PM
no ... i dont!

Thiago

So glad to see this ressurected 10/24/2005 4:38 PM
The war that Paraguay fought was led by a mad despot in Paraguay who did a pretty good
impression of Dom Quixote. For those with a bent to read further, I recommend "At the
Tomb of the Inflatable Pig".

As for the reason why Brazil should be part of the Security Council - which I covered in
earlier posts - the reason is simple: they are by far and above the best placed country in
South America to represent that continent.
Len
As for other countries, as I said before, I will only discuss them on a separate thread.

For hard-done-by woman who asked about Saudi Arabia: don't make me laugh so hard - it
hurts!

6.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/24/2005 8:56 PM
Hugo, what wasn´t fair for you?

Len, why would you laugh at my question or why would you laugh about saudi arabia??

Anyways, Syed (I have a good kashimiri friend with this name)my position on the other
msg was that I don´t believe in the veto power, there is only one power nowadays: USA!
Englad go after them, France might not agree with one or 2 subjects but USA would do it
anyways (for eg. the invasion in Iraq) and China wants to keep expanding its economy and
not let Japan come into the CS. This is it´s only interes. And Russia, I don´t know much
about it.. but what i know is that i don´t trust in this utopic power that the permanet
members sould have. So, can you imagine Brasil, India or any other latin and african
Dalila
country in it?? Who would hear them???

So, as a citizen of the world, I hope we have more justice there and everywhere and I hope
the actual participating countries could be able to bring and mantain peace and security to
all of us rather then discuss personal, political, or historical subjects.
@Beto…@Thiago 10/24/2005 9:02 PM
We respect your opinion I know our vote will not matter much and we will not be able to
make any change to the UN through Orkut. Please write the reason for your agreement
and disagreement. It will allow us understanding more clearly the issues of your region and
the people. I understand language is the problem. To express, one does not need to be
Syed perfect in the language. You still can pass on the message.
@Dalila 10/24/2005 9:02 PM
I keep people form the Middle East in two categories; form the oil rich countries and the
ones without oil.

I was once in transit with two friends of mine at the Dubai airport. We were just wandering
around shop to shop while waiting for our flight. the counter clerk in one of the shops was
listening to the English music. There was no one except for us. We tried to attract his
attention and wanted to talk to him. The man was so arrogant that while facing us he would
hardly move his eyes to look at us. These people have least respect for any one else other
than own kind. A few generations ago all the rulers of this oil rich region were robbers. I
hate oil rich Arabs. You are probably from the Middle East please no offence.
Syed

Saudis: They stand up to pay respect and to invite any white American even if he is a
technician only. At the same time they would not offer a seat to a senior Asian or Latin
American with colored skin even if he is educated to the level of doctorate. These countries
are the worst examples of apartheid in living history.
Continued…… 10/24/2005 9:03 PM
People who go to these countries for jobs or other work can’t keep their passports with
them; I would feel like a hostage in such circumstances, thanks that I have never lived in
any of these countries. These are the opinion of a few friends of mine who have lived in
KSA in connection with their jobs and like to speak the truth. For a lot others it is a holy
land and they would not say a word. Many would not want others to know that they were
working there on extremely lower ranks for the sake of money.

Judicial system of Saudis treats locals and expatriates differently. You can’t think of any
human rights there for men you can imagine what will be women in that nomadic society.
Every local is an informer to the local police and if you are in Saudi Arabia you don’t even
Syed think against the royal family. If you are caught you will not remain in this world. All the
laws are twisted to favour the locals. A local male will be found in every kind of immoral
activity while they keep their women in sealed pickings.

A common Saudi will hardly be able to understand what the UN is and its permanent
members. People from the non-oil Arabs and socialist form even the oil rich countries are
more humane and are aware of current and political affairs.
10/24/2005 10:11 PM
Indeed I still don´t know if I agree with the enterence of Brasil in the CS actually I prefer it
continue to be a neutral contry taking Switzerland as an example of how a country must
be!

6.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Dalila
10/24/2005 10:20 PM
Actually, Syed, I´m a brazilian citizen, was born here but my roots are all lebanese. A non
oil arab country. ;-)

And I asked about Saudi Arabia position because it´s a theme of work and study of mine
and wanted to know your opinions but I don´t agree with many positions they take
concerning Human Rights, definitely!!!!!!!
Dalila
10/25/2005 9:51 AM
Check out the following site I could not check the site thoroughly. http://www.saudi-un-
ny.org/ you will get the Saudi official position.

I heard that after the fall of Late Shah of Iran Saudi kingdom is the US policeman in this
region. It will not be strange that Uncle Sam decides to install one of its confidents into the
permanent seat.
Syed I remember reading an article that all the key posts in my country are made with the
approval of IMF, W Bank, and State Department. There have been exceptions of only
three ministers ever and these were in Late Bhutto Senior government.
10/25/2005 10:51 AM
Thank you so much, Syed.
My question was not only whether S.Arabia intends to have a permanant seat but who they
aprove and who they don´t aprove to be there... anyways..I´ll check the link you sent me.

Take care, you all.
And let´s pray that we get the best solution to all! ;-)
Dalila
10/25/2005 7:03 PM
My pleasure, you are welcome.

Syed

6.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Community United Nations
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=12388804&start=101&na=1&nid=

Topic: India & kashmir issue

India & kashmir issue 5/21/2005 11:18 AM
India has rejected UN resolutions on Kashmir dispute for nearly a half century
and has killed nearly 100,000 kashmiris..
Can India b stopped frm this and forced to accept the UN resolutions? ..if yes how?
₣ỪŘфẴП
5/21/2005 11:47 AM
First back up your figures.... each pakistani seems to come up with their own... and be sure
to mention only civilian deaths caused by our army, as you obviously have no concern for
those killed by pakistan-based terrorists.
Aloka
5/21/2005 11:47 AM
What a crap.
World now knows that its the Pak who exported the terrorism.
If you pakis are so soft hearted for the Kashmiris then tell me one thing how much
development or democratic form or Humna Rights & other fundamental rights have u
established in the POK.
U will have no answer.
Its world politics that Kashmir has no solution.
Pranav But terror is no solutuon to any problme which Pak tried till Sep 11 & now it has lost control
over it.
First look inside in your own nation & then talk about others.
Better for you.
5/21/2005 5:23 PM
Azad kashmir has 85% litercy rates they have complete rights as any citizen of pakistan
has there is no terrorism going on there neither people are stood up against government.

This term (acording to there turn which rotates into represntation from each province with
every tenure)The President of Fedration of Pakistan chamber of commerce and industry is
from Azad Kashmir.

Acording to united nations resolutions Pakistan is willing to hold a plabcite anytime it will
Akber demanded from them, and Goverment of Pakistan openly aclaim to acceppet the decion of
kashmiris weather they would like to stay with india pakistan or indepdent.

Kashmir never was ur india's attot Ang.(integral part)

its a disputed terrotry which is yet to be setteled (hopefully peacfully)
5/21/2005 11:51 PM
85%? More crap without back-up?
Don't you guys think twice before pulling figures out of the air?
And statements that are shocking lies?

Bhaskar
What about the Northern Areas where the literacy level is less than 15%?
@ Furgan 5/22/2005 3:40 AM
Yes, keep vomiting the Islam venom in every communities you fuckers!

It's so hilarious when a member of terrorist organisation comes forth to innocently claim
how their neighbours are slaying them. You Pakistanis, Iraqis, Syrians have created a
mess in the world. Now wait, let us finish with Iraq. I promise Pakistan will be next. We'll
kick some ass in Pakistan now!

Rosney
Rosney 5/22/2005 7:34 AM
really nice congratulation ... clap clap ... u think it s like that u will erradicate terorism ? do u
remenber ur actual GI's are for the most engaged in US army for only one reason ...
GREEN CARD. becoz for the most they are chicanos,puerto rican or from central america
Jean - & ur governemnt promise them to be USA citizen if they engage and go to war in IRAQ...
françois what u will do rosney when they will understand the USA act as a pro facist governemnt & "

7.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

the democraty " u propose to them is a dupe? what u will do ? u will go in Iraq, Iran or
pakistan kill innocents victims with ur bombs and take the natural ressources of those
countries, but forget to kill the real terorists ? u think as 3rd reich in second world war
rosney all that crap war is only a bissness interst & plz dont come tell me about the world
trade center u know it s a fake problem now, so one more time USA will rape the UN treaty
& do what ever they want .... what a great model of "Democracy " for someone who live in
a country who talk about peace and freedom & what a great inteligence for fix the terorism
problem dont u have shame Rosney? dont u have shame USA ? someone of ur familly is
dead durin the world trade center ? maybe ... so u will kill all the middle east for that ? but
remenber the terorists run away and are around u , it s always the innocents who are
victims to USA bombs
rosney 5/22/2005 7:39 AM
and for IRAQ u finish NOTHIN ! u just start for centuries congratualtion and nice choice ,
but it s true there enought oil for ur economy (y)

Jean -
françois
5/22/2005 9:09 AM
Both the countries leaderships dont give a rats ass to human lives unless one of their own
is involved.If they want this whole Kashmir issue can be settled within months.Pull out the
fucking 700,000 odd troops, and pressurize Pakistan to cut off all supplies, and relations
Unknown with the terrorists, and then let the Kashmiris decide what the fuck do they want, and end it
once and for all...but no,they'll never do it, or else how can they claim to be a superpower...
@Crabby 5/22/2005 9:50 AM
it's not that easy

if Pakistan could be pressurised so easily, India would surely have done that... as it is, they
needed a 9/11 and a Bush to even start dealing with terrorists.... and they still haven't cut
them off completely... LeT has been banned, but they operate under different names
now.... though i read recently that thanks to loss of support from Pakistan, the Indian army
has been able to crack down on the militants more effectively, lately... and they are not so
able to launch offensives anymore... instead they are resorting to random attacks like the 3
Aloka
bomb blasts in srinagar last week, and the one on the mourners at a funeral, etc.

last week thousands of school children protested against the attacks on children...
hopefully the peace initiatives taken will lead the kashmiris to rise up against the militants
who kill the very people they claim to be fighting for :|

Chaotic 5/22/2005 9:58 AM
can u tell me why with 700,000 odd troops Indian army cant secure the lives of innocent
people there?people in kashmir valley live in perpetual fear.If India wants to convince
them,the very first thing they need to do is to alleviate their fear of death, and they are
misearbly failing to do so.It leads to a conclusion that common people there are not
friendly to the army.Israel also faec the same kind of problem where suicide bombers rip
Unknown off shopping malls, but at least the common Israelis support their armies full time.Do you
think the same is the case with Kashmir.Had it been so, there would have been no
problem.
5/22/2005 11:32 AM
Why don't you begin by talking sense by first proving that there are 700000 Indian army
men in Kashmir, before we examine the rest of your doped out sentences stemming out of
the ever reverential and holy Stalin and Mao ideologies?
Bhaskar
5/22/2005 1:56 PM
oh the old man is back as usual spitting out random bullcrap...anyways are u doubting the
figure 700,000 eve after GoI admitted it?
which link would u believe then man?
anyways u may check this one.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_22-2-2003_pg4_18
Unknown
Its a link from a very liberal Pakistan website, and I believe I read the same in rediff
sometimes back.
5/23/2005 12:12 AM
Yeah, I expected some such trash and is truly a reflection of the trash you read.
You pull out figures from Pakistani sources, but have you never noticed that that the
Pakistanis can never back their figures?

7.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Bhaskar
The Indian Army had 980,000 active troops in 2002 of which 700000 are in Kashmir? Isn't
that ridiculous? Open the map and take a long hard look.

As for all other figures and the ridiculous portrayal of figures by the Pakistanis and their
media read what the
Indian Army in Kashmir has to say on the matter.
Not surprisingly this website of the Indian Army is frequently subject to attacks by Pakistani
hackers.

You asked what the Indian Army does in Kashmir? Have you realised that cross border
terrorism has come down drastically.
The figure for CONFLICT CASUALTIES in 2004 is between 200-350 and these figures
includes casualties in all the following categories:

1. Terrorist deaths
2. Civilians killed by terrorists.
3. Civilians killed during Indian armed forces' encounters.
4. Civilians killed by Pakistani armed forces by shelling and border crossfire.
5. Indian and Pak armed forces deaths due to border engagements/skirmishes...

The Pakistanis never discuss this split let alone where they get their inflated and imaginary
figures from.
Crabby 5/23/2005 2:04 AM
How about you change your name to crappy?

Funny allegations, eh! India has a little less than 1 mil. active troops out of which 700
thousands in Kashmir????

Jean, nice idea, we could consider bombing the whole of mid east - no islams no
problems. The left over terrorists - well we'll pick them up one by one, gradually.
Rosney
Bhaskar 5/23/2005 2:49 AM
I am Senior vice president of FPCCI Standing Commitee on information techonology

This figure of 85% litercy rate in Azad kashmir is quoted by current president of FPCCI
(who is from azad kashmir and next candidate for Prime minstership of Azad Kashmir)
during the seminar on Education and how FPCCI can contribute to elivate the litercy rate.

Go, check and confirm these figures before out wrightly rejecting it without any basis.

Why do you have to be so insulting in disscussion, today 130 member delagtion of FICCI
(Fedration of Indian Chamber of Commerce and industry) has arrived in Pakistan.

FPCCI and FICCI are on pretty good terms even when the goverments were hostile
towards each other.

I have personally experieced there hospitality when i went india for the first time in last
november along with Prime Minster's delegation for the trade fair in Dehli.
Akber
I personally found common indians to be very hospitable and mellow compare to ppl from
our country who are a bit more emotinal in everything.

I have disscussions with common indians on every subject and none of them tried to prove
me wrong or defy my reservations for what your goverment is doing in Kashmir or last
hindutva BJP goverment did in Gujrat, or they express there on embarasment on the fall of
Babri majid.

There was General consencus that we common pakistanis and indians dont have any
grudges for each other its the bad curropt politicans and politics that is causing these mis
conceptions and problems on both side of borders.

Neither anyone objected that kashmir is not a disputed territory.

7.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

5/23/2005 3:02 AM
its during the recent history of bjp goverment that they pose a diffrent attitude towards
kashmir, instead of shying away from talking about 50 year old UN resoloution to hold a
plabcite to decide the fate of kashmiris acording to there wishes, they suddenly pose a
diffrent attitude and calling it out there is no dispute at all about kashmir the uprising of ppl
of kasmir to seek indepdence from india is india's internal problem.

Probably a sketch work of what israel did in Palestine.

Akber But here india needed to be reminded neither india is israel nor Pakistan is Palestine.

its a diffrent scenario, so same facist tactics wont work in every part of world.

recently another claim by VHP (militant political allaince partry of former BJP goverment)
they claimed that Taj Mahal is built on ruins of Shiva's mandir so the taj mahal should be
handed over to them and converted into a Temple.
5/23/2005 3:20 AM
recently another claim by VHP (militant political allaince partry of former BJP goverment)
they claimed that Taj Mahal is built on ruins of Shiva's mandir so the taj mahal should be
handed over to them and converted into a Temple.

firstly, don't bring in irrelevant points, and that, too, something that people hardly paid any
attention to even in India.
Aloka
secondly, while VHP may be extremist, they are not a militant group. don't make false
accusations blindly. at least have a semblance of proof to back up your claims.
crabby 5/23/2005 3:34 AM
dont mind rosney's posts.. she is just 19.

:)
Akber
@ Akber 5/23/2005 4:02 AM
Some of the suicide bombers in Palestine were found to be as young as 10 years old, but
were no less a potential danger than any 40 years old terrorist.

But an observatione, in your profile:
religion: Islam
political view: libertarian

Rosney These two are not possible simultaneously!

Akber 5/23/2005 4:06 AM
You bring in instances (I am also questioning their credibilty) which have nothing to do with
the issue currently in consideration. "India Taj mehal and all that crap".

This I have observed has been a particular habit of all Pakistanians; When they start falling
short of arguments they start filling in bullshit. I am sure Indians too have a lot of such
complaints against Pakistan, but do I remember an Indian discussing mangoes in a beer
party? NO!
Rosney
@Rosney 5/23/2005 4:37 AM
we r not falling short of arguments..n we r not talking shit..
the resolutions of UN are not shit and they must b implemented if we want a fair and
peaceful solution to the Kashmir dispute and this can b done by
1, complete withdrawl of Indian troops.
2, plebiscite under UN
₣ỪŘфẴП ..and remember one thing the people fighting in Kashmir are freedom fighters
not terrorists..they r fighting to liberate there land from Indian forces..they are the people
whose fathers,mothers,brothers n sisters .. are murdered brutally by Indian forces dats y
they are fighting against dem...
5/23/2005 5:20 AM
It does not matter who you are or how old you are, what matters is the credibility of the
content that you post.
Your being Sr VP of FPCCI of the standing Committee on IT means nothing to me.
Bhaskar ( And Committee is spelt with a double m, double t and double e.)

7.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Since you spoke of literacy in POK ( Pakistan Occupied Kashmir) out of the blue, I want
you to back it up with your census figures.
I'm saying 85% literacy is bull, now why don't you prove me otherwise by posting the
census figures instead of telling us that somebody quoted it and it has not been disputed
so far?

Now save the ramble and stick to topic.
Don't hijack the thread by creating various vectors of conversation. I'm sure you
understand what I say Mr Sr VP.
@ Furqan 5/23/2005 6:26 AM
Since you initiated the topic why don't you post the concerned UN resolutions that you
keep speaking about that also speak of Pakistan's obligations?

Bhaskar That will truly prove who is not following UN resolutions.
wtf 5/23/2005 5:52 AM
Bhaskar odnt u even believe Indian media? Rediff,Indiatimes everyone mentions that
number.One reference here.

"We will, god willing, continue our work, and our firm stand is that so long as 700,000
Indian troops are present in Kashmir, they [Pakistan] have no right to ask us to withdraw."

Unknown and do you think that army in kashmir website gives you all true records about human
rights violation?Why dont they allow Amnesty INternational and other international aid
oprganization in the interiors to know whats going on?

Rosney,what the fuck is your problem?Do you have any data other than usual bullshit?
Prat / Crabby 5/23/2005 7:18 AM
Do you even read the bullshit that you post.

The Rediff article that you have highlighted is within quotes, quotes that came from the
leader of a banned terrorist outfit ( banned now even in Pakistan after the US banned it).
So what you are quoting is in effect is a terrorist's words as back-up.

Did you read the article by the Indian Army that I put up?
I don't see any reason why the Indian Army should lie about such things, which can be
easily confirmed.

Secondly use your commonsense.
Bhaskar 700,000 out of 980,000 in Kashmir alone?
The Indian strategists must be stupid to leave a lot of other fronts vulnerable going by your
logic.

How do you state Amnesty International has never been let inside Kashmir?
Have you checked up or is this another figment of your imagination?

Lastly take a long hard look at the topic. If you can't contribute/stick to the topic don't troll
or hijack the thread.
5/23/2005 7:42 AM
Bhaskar,without bullshitting provide any data that denies the 700,000 Indian troops in
Kasmir.I havent found a direct link from Indian army, but both Indian,Pakistani and
Western media confirms the data, so quit bullshitting which is your favorite pastime.

Regarding the topic,if Indian army and Govt can not win the confidence of the Kashmiris,
Unknown they will lose it today or tomorrow.Recently conducted Times of India survey showed that
53.9% Kashmiris want INdependence, while 36.2% want to be in India.You may check it
here.So its high time, the hardcore right-wingers should come out of the fantasy that
Kashmir belongs to India only.BTW Times of India is an Indian newspaper.
Prat / Crabby 5/23/2005 7:55 AM
When you say 700,000 the onus is on you to provide proof.

Since you can't it is apparent that you cannot provide any credible sources to back your
bullshit, which is hardly surprising that you lack credibility.
Bhaskar
Can't give up your trolling habits?

7.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

I suggested earlier that you read the topic initiated, and stick to it.
Nobody really wants to hear your ill-informed commie propaganda laden opinion.
@ bhaskar 5/23/2005 8:59 AM
hey read this on UN website

UN Document Symbol: S/RES/47(1948)

Issuing Body / Session: S/ 3

Enhanced Title: Security Council resolution 47 (1948) [on restoration of peace and order
and the plebiscite in the State of Jammu and Kashmir]

Title: Resolution 47 (1948) / [adopted by the Security Council at its 286th meeting], of 21
April 1948.

Description: [6] p.

Author / Contributors: UN. Security Council (3rd year : 1948)

Notes: Concerns restoration of peace and order and the plebiscite in the State of Jammu
and Kashmir.

Relation Notes: In: Resolutions and decisions of the Security Council, 1948. -
S/INF/2/REV.1(III). - 1964. - p. 3-8. - (SCOR, 3rd year).

Subjects: CEASEFIRES
TROOP WITHDRAWAL
₣ỪŘфẴП PAKISTAN
INDIA
TROOP WITHDRAWAL
PLEBISCITES
POLITICAL PRISONERS
CEASEFIRES
JAMMU AND KASHMIR
INDIA-PAKISTAN QUESTION
NEGOTIATION
PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS
UN Commission for India and Pakistan
UN Military Observer Group in India and Pakistan

Link To: Full text: Chinese Full text: English Full text: French Full text: Russian Full text:
Spanish

Type of Material: Resolutions and decisions (UN) B01

Distribution: GEN

Job Number: NR004772 E

MARC Display
5/23/2005 8:07 AM
Paste the links so we can all read the relevant stuff directly from the site.

Bhaskar

Bhaskar 5/23/2005 9:08 AM
Do you beleive in the Times of India Survey, or thats also a Commie Propaganda?

Let me state it again - About 57% Kashmiris said that they want Independence....what do
Unknown you say about this,crush them all huh...

7.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Prat / Crabby 5/23/2005 8:12 AM
Stop being stupid and stop trolling.

Bhaskar
@rosney 5/23/2005 8:11 AM
u dnt have a valid point plz dnt shit into da discussion....

i think every one knows here who is right and who is wrong wabout US attacks on
₣ỪŘфẴП Afghanistan and iraq

bhaskar 5/23/2005 8:20 AM
http://unbisnet.un.org:8080/ipac20/ipac.jsp?session=111685391M1AJ.10314&profile=bib&
uri=full=3100001~!234323~!1&ri=6&aspect=power&menu=search&source=~!horizon

₣ỪŘфẴП
5/23/2005 8:24 AM
old man coming down to his level as ususal....u'll even deny if tomorrow this survey is
carried out by NDTV, or even DoorDarshan?Its really amazing how some people love to
live in perpetual self-denial.
Unknown
@ Furqan 5/23/2005 9:42 AM
1. Consider the Jan 17, 1948 resolution.

1. Calls upon both the Government of India and the Government of Pakistan to take
immediately all measures within their power (including public appeals to their people)
calculated to improve the situation, and to refrain from making any statements and from
doing or causing to be done or permitting any acts which might aggravate the situation;

Pakistan internally incites its citizens on the situation through the media and actively
promotes jehadi/terrorist activity. This is a violation of the RESOLUTION.

2. Further requests each of those Governments to inform the Council immediately of any
Bhaskar material change in the situation which occurs or appears to either of them to be about to
occur while the matter is under consideration by the Council, and consult with the Council
thereon.

Pakistan split the area occupied by it into Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas and even
gifted a part of Kashmir to China.
This is in clear violation of point 2.

@ Furqan 5/23/2005 8:59 AM
Now consider the April 21, 1948 Resolution

The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavors:

1. 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
purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and any
furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State;

Clearly Pakistan has not withdrawn any Pakistan nationals which includes its army from
Kashmir as on date.
Bhaskar Having withdrawn from Pakistan occupied Kashmir, Pakistan is also duty bound to prevent
infiltration.

2. To make known to all concerned that the measures indicated in this and the following
paragraphs provide full freedom to all subjects of the State, regardless of creed, caste, or
party, to express their views and to vote on the question of the accession of the State, and
that therefore they should co-operate in the maintenance of peace and order.

7.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Pakistan is duty to bound to cooperate in the maintenace of peace and order having
withdrawn from all of Kashmir specified in Point 1.

Now these are the obligations on the part of Pakistan even BEFORE the obligations on
India.

When Pakistan does not vacate ALL of the Kashmiri area occupied by it, including the
Northern Areas as well as getting the Chinese to vacate the land gifted by Pakistan, where
is the question of India even taking the first step towards meeting its obligaions?

rosney 5/23/2005 3:29 PM
ya ... but stupidity and facism is compatible with very libertian & christian protestant there
no doubts ( we had precedents in history...) why dont u open a budweiser and watch the
nba play off ? u dont like basket balls ?
rember ur country is alone, few countries support u now and maybe one day, think about it,
it s ur country who will be bombed as the middle east & more u think as u do & u not an
USA special case, more there chance it will arrive , maybe ur the best puissance of the
Jean - world but certains countries could erradicate u , if u continue to talk in this manner u never
françois know , so i really wish the next 4 years pass fast and u change president becoz actually for
most of countries around the world it s not 50 stars u have in ur flag ( i know i repeat me )
but it s 50 svatikas ... i give up & i surrender

rosney,, Teri Chut hamarey Lorey. 5/23/2005 10:52 PM
I think this community is based on united and peace but people who are talking shit and
have wrong statement about any religion they are wrong. a person speaking shit about any
other Religion it means he / she himself do not have a religion, so please stop talking about
that crab which you are talking again and again, seems like you are offering your pussy in
front of us pakistanis and no one is even looking at you. Forget it we dont like to even fuck
these people who themselves don't know about their fathers and mothers. we people atlest
know who we are.
kicking people;s ass, watch out your own cause we dont kick ass we just blowww..!
so still not enough then go and find out for your real parents.
And remember this,It is in the mind of men that the defence of peace must be constructed.
So we are all like brothers and the issue of Kashmir can only be solved with transparecy
Amir and positive negotiation between Pakistan and India,(as we are the same people and
culture) the rest of the world do not need to interfare.
Make peace no War.
Warna teri behn ko lun de dengey.

5/24/2005 12:21 AM
@Crabby

My problem:
There is no second opinion (other than in mid east ofcourse) that Pakistan has been a
terrorist supporting nation and is still involved in these activities directly/indirectly. And
when a person from such a country comes crying for help (read the first post) this is what
pisses me off. This is the height of hypocricy. Your ppl. are busy murdering the innocent
and you allege other countries of such hedious crimes which they have actually not
committed, let alone admitting your own sins!

What data do you want. If pulling out figures from air is data according to you, and that is
what you have been doing.

I have a data, Pakistan recently granted $ 1 bil. to the masked sub groups of LeT to
encourage them to carry on their terrorist activites. Now quoting yourself:
"Crabby, without bullshitting provide any data that denies the $ 1 bil. grant to LeT by
Rosney Pakistan."

@ Furgan
Yes, you now have my problem clear. Read it 10 times.

@ Jean
I agree that we had our own dismerits, and that is why we now have church strictly
seperated from the state. We don't have no more crucades? We have come past the adrk
ages realizing that human conscience fares far better than a religion which asks you to do

7.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

away with logic and follow a text interpreting it any weird way you wish to! I agree that Bush
has interfered too much with mid east, but not before Sept. 11!
"America (and for that matter any nation in the world) would never sought a permission slip
to defend the scurity of our country." I don't think there's any problem with America, UK,
Israel, India or China, problem is with their counter parts. The fanatic Islam countries.

@ Amir
"I think this community is based on united and peace"
And perhaps that is why you think you have a licence to mass murder the world and then
go around whining that your ppl. are being killed instead!
YES, I don't have a religion. If jihad and fitwa is all that religion has to teach me, if
paedophiles are who my prophets are;
contd....

contd... 5/24/2005 12:31 AM
then pardon me Amir for not having a religion as great as yours!

"So we are all like brothers and the issue of Kashmir can only be solved with transparecy
and positive negotiation between Pakistan and India"
Perhaps you are right, for Islam is the only religion which can instruct you to murder you
brothers and sisters.
What hypocrites? In an Indian community, you spew with your venomous tongue; when
faced with the international community who knows well your crimes, you start assuming
new friendship bonds?

And lastly, peace, yes who deos not want peace. In words of Sharon, "I am a pragmatic
person. I like peace, but peace which guarantees a permanant solution and ensures the
saftey of my country men"
Amir, I welcome you for a discussion on how to resolve issues, but not before you and
your country men cease slaying the innocent.

Rosney

Finally Jean,
by having a soft attitude towards terrorist and their supporters all you are doing i
encouraging them! These are bestile beings, they understand no love, gratitude or a sense
of responsibility. Pearls are not to be thrown in front of swines.
Best way to gain is peace to be prepared for war. If not tell me why your nation, France,
has been repeatedly been carrying out nuclear tests since 95, disregarding all treaties?

Finally, quoting Roberta, "There would be no problems the day these Arabs start loving
their chgildren more than they hate us!".
Rosey. 5/24/2005 1:51 AM
Ok but why are you hiding your Brest..?

Amir
@ Amir 5/24/2005 2:57 AM
Keep your abusive sexually vulgar language out of these communities.
I would have thought that at least your fellow Pakistanis would have pulled you up for such
language towards a lady.
But no that is not a Pakistani quality.
Admitting wrong and pulling up their own when wrong.

You must be own dope when you say India and Pakistan share the same culture.
Bhaskar We don't have ANYTHING in common as common culture except for a few who speak the
same language in both countries, Punjabi.
We would rather that you guys keep your disgusting violence and rape prone culture to
yourselves than associate yourself with anything remotely Indian let alone Hindu for that
matter.

7.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Had I been the Mod of this community I would have kicked you out for the language that
you used on Rosney.
You are a coward aren't you using the choicest expletives in Urdu/Hindi hoping nobody
else will understand?
Bhaskar. 5/24/2005 2:13 AM
Kiu oooe teri behn lagdi hai..?
Condom ki nasal.

Amir
Rosney 5/24/2005 7:02 AM
And when a person from such a country comes crying for help (read the first post) this is
what pisses me off. This is the height of hypocricy.

And do u know what pisses me off, when a person like u supports a president that likes to
Unknown kill babies in other countries for PEACE....a president that talks about democracy and
human rights while his army bombs the civilians, and tortures the POWS in the cruelest
way possible....height of hypocricy isnt it?
wildly old bhaskar 5/24/2005 7:11 AM
as i have said earlier, everybody on the humanist side of this community please ignore
rosney she is just 19, it clearly appear she hardly have any knowledge about world history.

cause if she did know anything about history of how israel came into being in 1948 after
illigitmate occuping the land of palestine through bloodshed, war and displacing the ppl
who were living there for a millenium she never would have supported israel.

if she knew from history that from 1948 till 1967 (arab - israel war) palestinians went to
every corridor to seek justice for there displacement plight and illeagle and illegitmate
occupation of there lands, but no one helped them, the united nations who wanted to
assume a resolution to support them was countinusly to date being vetoed by his own
country usa.

its only after 1967 (can anyone count the years for me) 19 years of peacfull struggle to
seek justice to get there country back in the age of enlightment and age of human rights,
was the time they took up arms and started a miltry offensive to get there land back
Akber themselves, they lost again but they didnt lost there hope so they continue to struggle to
free there land, with whatever means they got..

only if she knew history she would know that sadam hussain was america's own ally
during iraq iran war, (sadam hussain never been friends with pakistan)
but they have full friendly relationships with India even during the first gulf war in 1991
when you were probably would be 4 years old, pakistan supported united states while india
hosted sadam hussains air craft on there land.

Only if she knew that Osama bin laden was brought and trained by americans themselves,
they are the one who funded him equiped him called him mujahid and ppl of afghanistan
the fighters(later being called taliban and there ancestors and even later terrorists)
Mujhaiden.

only if she knew during the cold war era india was the close and regional ally of USSR.
5/24/2005 7:46 AM
only if she knew in 1986 moscow olympics (when she probably didnt even born yet) the
whole west, middle east usa and yes inculding yours truly pakistan boycotted the thoes
olympics to show support with mujahideen (again funded and armed by usa) who were
fighting against illegal occupation of ussr.
Akber
While india participated and send there sports deligation to show there support with ussr
being there ally and to support there honderous killing of innocent ppl in afghanistan.
5/24/2005 8:01 AM
rosney .. dont beleive me (i dont expect that from you after i see how you have been brain
washed and fed by jewish media)

Akber read some un baised writers to make your self politicaly and historically correct.

7.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

read noam chomsky, edward said, eqbal ahmed, arundhuti roy or David Barsamian.

So you should know the truth.

You said religon islam and political views libertarian cant possible together.

well forget for a moment tht i am a muslim and tell me if i sound like libertarian or not ?

:D

and excuse Amir, you see there are all kind of ppl in every society and one person's
actions possibly cant represent all.

peace ..

will answer bhaskar n detail later..
Akber 5/24/2005 9:17 AM
That I am 19 - a cunning and yet stupid way to discard someones opinion you either don't
have enough guts to answer or not interested in? - whatever,.
And, similarly I claim - that you come from a country where Islamic clerics have
brainwashed you, and hence your arguments lack credibility too? Anyway, I would try not
to answer personal comments though.

And again I must say that you previous post was full of 'data' and 'enlightning' oh wise one,
but don't you thin you are still selling mangoes in a bar?

You have just presented one side of the coin. You and your data?????

Both the parties know the fact. Mid east countries are busy ruining the world.
Rosney Terrorism = Islam.

Anyway, Bhaskar, just ignore Furgan, Akber, et. al. they have never seen democracy, their
clerics and prophets are paedophiles, they have been brainwashed by their intolerant
religious texts, they come from a country where media is limited in accessibility and scope.
What else can you expect from such well-dwellers?
Rosney 5/24/2005 8:17 AM
Ok,forget about the world,can we discuss what kind of civil rights you white Americans
gave to the colored people?Even in sixties,there were everything seperate - white
restroom,black restroom,colored people were not allowed to eat lunch with the whites...and
what about the Ku Klux Klan(KKK),forgot everything huh?Why is there only 1 African-
American senator in the senate?
Unknown Heck why am I explaining these to a redneck...

Oops did i miss the massacre of Indians who were originally living in this "Land of
Freedom"...

5/24/2005 8:31 AM
hey Akber "chomsky, edward said, eqbal ahmed, arundhuti roy or David Barsamian" - are
these names of Islamic clerics?
Unknown
rosney 5/24/2005 11:23 AM
i said there others methods for fight the terorism as bomb innocents ppl and kill
civilians,coz actualy u have the same methods as terorists muslims and make 1000 X
damages than them ...it s never ben laden and others dumbass terorists organizations,who
are killed, and it s that i dont agree ... i dont agree BUSH methods & BEN LADEN
methods.I dont agree the pakistanese government could support the djhiad as all muslims
countries in the world & yes theocracy it s an old politic power who must be erradicated but
at the same time,i think some cultivate muslims (who was in US ,UK or French
Jean - Universities) use and abuse of this power coz they know the ignorances of their population
françois and it s a shame,it s those corrupted ppl,USA must destroy but at the same time USA
politicians are not an exemple of purity as most of politicians around the world ( as my
president too ) about Nuclear French test u right in 1995 there is 1 try in Oceania zone and
my country raped UN treat but at my knowledge it s the only time my country
did,since,noone in france have knowledge French army continue nuclear weapon tests in

7.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

real environment but maybe u have some informations ppl dont have it ..Idont see why
they should continue coz we have a dissuasive weapon could make 800X damages than
hiroshima .i disagree nuclear and other form or violence ... peace
Rosney 5/24/2005 8:39 PM
like i said earlier i dont expect you to beleive me ..

the reason i was able to predicted your responce more or less is because i was once 19
too..

i know how much one could be in self delusion of "know it all" at tht time then any later age
in life.

and this is why i didnt suggested you to read or follow islamic clerics, i asked you to do
Akber yourself a favour and read unbaised political and history writers such as chomsky, edward
said, eqbal ahmed, arundhuti roy or David Barsamian"

and always keep in mind what socrates said.

"i know only one thing that i know nothing"

we can never be know it all.
@ Crabby 5/25/2005 12:25 AM
You missed a lot more, USA nuked Japan!!!
England enslaved so many countries around the globe.
....
...
..
.

Well, so now I must give up for you have piled up enough evidences to justify legimitizing
the actions of terrorists.

Jean
Agree to everything you say.

Akber
like i said earlier i dont expect you to beleive me ..

the reason i was able to predicted your responce more or less is was not because i was
once muslim (god forbid that) too.., but bcuz I realize how dumb you ppl. are made in your
closed and isolated society.

Rosney i know how much one could be in self delusion of "know it all" in this religion then any other
religion in life.

and this is why i 'didnt suggested' you to read or follow democratic and liberal writers, i
asked you to do yourself a favour and read unbaised political and history writers such as
chomsky, edward said, eqbal ahmed, arundhuti roy or David Barsamian"
(Yes, you read them first, I don't get any thing from these writers which support a word you
say!)

and always keep in mind what socrates said. - He said a lot of thing, but probably in your
society you could only lay your hands upon one of his adages

"i know only one thing that i know nothing" - Yes I know that Akber!

we can never be know it all. - I realize that and hence unlike Islamists we here in
Democratic countries do not impose our opinions on others!

reply to topic - done that!

7.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

rosney rosney rosney.. 5/25/2005 5:11 AM
have you read any of the authors i have mentioned above?

if you haven't then read any of them anyone at all.

They all consider israel to be occupier they all scold usa for his un due favouring of israel.

they all have diffrent perspective then what you have been fed by jewish media infact they
all also mentioned the influence of jewish media in usa.

do you want me to suggest you some books.

"Cost of living" and "war talk" by Arundhuti roy.

in which she tried to explain the plight of few social activist on hunger strike for more then
14 days to peacfully register there protest against the displacement of thousands of ppl
from there homeland because goverment needed that land to develope Narmada Dam and
no goverment offical up till then reached them nor the press gave them any importance
after the first day or two.

she came out and question us, media and everbody listen to bombs and sucide killing no
body would even notice the peacefull protest even if the protesters lose there life in
Akber process, so arent in a way we are giving way to terrorism by not giving due attention to
peacfull way of protesting being heard and seeking justice.

if you have little reason in your head and if you have even shread of humanity in you try to
understand, terrorism is wrong killing innocent ppl is absolutely wrong (Yes even israelies)
but the world has not left any other room for them. Had the world would have done justice
to them this menace of terror neever would have created.

mark my words its Injustice that breeds terrorism not religon.

"Confronting the empire" interviews of Eqbal Ahmed by david Brasmian.

"Propaganda and the Public Mind" by David Barsamian and Noam Chomsky

"Chomsky on Democracy and Education" by Noam Chomsky,

most importantly use your reason put yourself in shoes of palestinians what you would
have done if you would have been in there place and how would expect from the way the
world should treet you.
5/25/2005 5:35 AM
Fateful Triangle
The United States, Israel & The Palestinians by Noam Chomsky

Necessary Illusions
Akber Thought Control in Democratic Societies
by Noam Chomsky
5/25/2005 6:49 AM
Rosney
None is justifying terrorists here.But ofcourse, a redneck racist like u will hardly understand
that.Killing civilians is a favorite sports to US Govt, no matter where, be it Sarajevo,be it
Iraq,, be it Afghanisthan, be it Vietnam, Korea....have u ever said a single word agianst
it...when ur army kills 2 year old babies?
Anyways, now back to the topic....I dont know how feasible is the plebisite now,but one
Unknown thing is for sure, a huge part of Kashmiris DO NOT want to be aprt of INDIA, and they are
really really against the army occupation, and living under perpertual fear.If freedom is
what they want(as shown in the survey I posted before), and if it leads to a peaceful
coexistence between India and Kashmir, I am all for it.

7.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Crabby 5/25/2005 7:57 AM
Don't have to scribble in my scrapbook. You can call me all the names you are giving me
here itself!!

Rosney
5/25/2005 8:02 AM
"DO NOT want to be aprt of INDIA,"

From where did you get that idea? Now here is a point where I must ask for the source
'data'?
Clearly your association with Islamists have slowed your mind.
Well, I have some news from, what you are saying is actually correct but not quite!!! But
you know why, because more than half of the Kashmiris who were Hindus have been
driven out of the valley through constant use of terrorism by Pakistan and the left overs are
only Muslims and they are the ones who wish to be with Pakistan because their they can
nurture their ill cultures freely.

So, just like the mid east world you only are worried about the rights of Muslims, aren't
you? Who is to voice the opinion of millions of Hindus driven out from kshmir? Who is to
fight for their rights over this piece of land?? Muslims create all the problems and then
Rosney
blame rest of the world for it! Call me a racist if you wish to, but I'll stick to the truth if being
a racist is what it takes, then so be it!

btw, i know you are a Muslim too! ANd moreover you are an Indian too!! So, we here have
a wonderful example of how Muslims inside India support the Islamic countries. You
Muslims are a lot of shameless swines who betray the same people and the very
fatherland who feed you!!
Crabby 5/25/2005 8:13 AM
You should be ashamed of your self, but how would you be? You are a Mulsim!

Being an Indian and yet you are supporting the cause of Pakistan.

Now, do not come up with some crap like I am being unbiased, irrespective of my
nationality, etc. etc.
The whole world knows how the king Kashmir took refuge in India agreeing one certain
conditions which India laid then, when Pakistan tried to annex Kashmir!!

What do you takje us to be? Some idiots who have no knowledge of what you and your
Rosney
paedophile prophet have been doing throughout the history? Well, OK, you can be
pardoned for that - but supporting the cause of an alien nation at the cost of your own -
only a Muslim can do that!

Crabby 5/25/2005 8:13 AM
You should be ashamed of your self, but how would you be? You are a Mulsim!

Being an Indian and yet you are supporting the cause of Pakistan.

Now, do not come up with some crap like I am being unbiased, irrespective of my
nationality, etc. etc.
The whole world knows how the king Kashmir took refuge in India agreeing one certain
conditions which India laid then, when Pakistan tried to annex Kashmir!!

What do you takje us to be? Some idiots who have no knowledge of what you and your
Rosney
paedophile prophet have been doing throughout the history? Well, OK, you can be
pardoned for that - but supporting the cause of an alien nation at the cost of your own -
only a Muslim can do that!
Rosney 5/25/2005 10:04 AM
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
I'm a Muslim...I'm falling off my chair, and rolling on the ground...ha ha ha....its really
amazing how your fucking president have polarized your mind...if u can read fucking
Unknown english, then once go though my profile to clear ur doubts...btw its really difficult to talk

7.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

sense to a redneck,moronic,racist like you who doesnt know jackshit about world politics.
More than half the population in Kashmir was Hindu?since when?
Hindus have fled from the valleys, yes,so did the Muslims from Indian Kashmir to Pakistani
Kashmir...why the fuck are you presenting one side of the story?But, the number of
Kashmiris Pandits never reached millions,this is absolute bullshit...and when the fuck did I
say that kashmir should go to Pakistan?Its a disputed territoty, and as u belive in the great
democracy preached by Bush, dont u think that its right to let them decide what they
want,plz dont be a hypocrite here....as I told alredy, Times of India survey have already
showed that 57% of them want indpendence....its true its not 100%, but at least it shows
that they are not HAPPY with the present state of affairs....and India Govt is doing nothing
for that....and plz dont try to instill bullcrap natioanlism into me...I'm Indian and I know what
I am saying...coz at least I know 1000000 times better than you how things work in India....
5/25/2005 10:28 AM
and also Rosney...it'll be great if you keep your racist agenda for the California
republicans...they badly need it,or else they'll become an extinct species one day...ha ha
Unknown ha ...
Prat / Crabby 5/25/2005 10:43 AM
You don't know shit about India let alone anything else.
You can't back up a single thing you say, so much for your credibility.

I admire your commie value systems for abusing the American people and the American
political system after sponging off their tax payers money to further your subsidised
Bhaskar education there.

BTW why did your PRAT profile get banned by Orkut?
5/25/2005 11:05 AM
ha ha ha...now a Hindu Jihadi,Raam devoteee monkey man is gonna teach me about
India....LMAO...
Unknown
Crabby 5/26/2005 12:07 AM
Reading your previous posts dear I can understand that you are not only out of arguments
but also tired of covering up your earlier lies. Take a break, go rest and think again that
what was the point you really wished to make! For I don't see any in your previous posts.
Excessive use of the Big F word won't help.

Rosney
rosney. 5/26/2005 12:10 AM
Go resney Go i m with u.
Ages dosent makes any sense but the opinion does.
Rosney is right.

James
even india is a terrorist. 5/26/2005 12:17 AM
Hey crabby or should i call u crappy as rosney said erlier,
i myself had experienced indian and paki people they all are the same faqerrz1

James
5/26/2005 1:41 AM
as if one redneck was not enough here we have one more now...

Unknown
5/26/2005 2:48 AM
isnt it bad enough to have some folks discussing stuff they dont know about, that people
have to name/quote that publicity seeking booker winner (the goddess of small minds)?
Prasanna

7.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@rosney 5/26/2005 1:55 AM
"You should be ashamed of your self, but how would you be? You are a Mulsim!"

If only it were just muslims - you would have been able to point it out, but no.
Prasanna
Its the marxists as well.
James 5/26/2005 2:12 AM
Thnx for the support but I would beg to differ with your opinion about India. I have been to
India, many of my friends are Indians. Non-Muslim Indians are really nice people to talk to
and be with.

Rosney
5/26/2005 2:30 AM
yah Rosney, Hindu Jihadis, and redncek Bush lover Americans make good couples....

Unknown
5/26/2005 3:17 AM
first, even Ghandi was against the division of India.

Then the attacks seem allways to come from the pakistanese side, the hindu are forced to
retaliate for their own survival.

Some muslims (I said some) seem keen in causing situations, so it seems.
Yan
So, there shoud be no conflict even, since, clear enough, This region has allways been a
part of India.
Crabby 5/26/2005 5:22 AM
I was looking for a site with some good jokes, but no more after reading your posts.

Haraam Khor!
Jis thaalee mein khaate ho, usi mein ched karte ho?
Pakistan ko kashmir ki jagah tumhari behen nahin de den kya agar kal ko kashmir ke log
tumhaari behen maangne lagein? Pakistan ki frustoo army achha use karegi tumhaari
behen ka!

And yes, many Hindus have been driven out in kashmir. Number counts upto millions
starting from independence, of which hundred thousands are refugees in Delhi alone!!!

Yeh besharam Musalman, Muhammad ke pille, apne masehe ki tarahan problems create
kartein hain to fir USA ho ya Hindus, retaliate to karenge hi!
Tum logon ke bacche martein hain to marne do, achha hi hai. Cancer ko early stages mein
hi khatm kar dena chahiye!
@ No 5/26/2005 6:59 AM
Cool it.
Keep the abuse out.
Bhaskar
No 5/26/2005 7:26 AM
Why are Hindu jihadis like you feeling so insecure?How about we see some facts about
army atrocities documented by freelance journalists...You should no whats the angelic
Indian army doing there,wont u?
Unknown PS:When the fuck did I say that Kashmir should go to Pakistan,dont fucking put words in
my mouth.
Bashkar and Rosney. 5/26/2005 9:59 PM
Its is good that you people do not interfare between these issues Because you people
acyually dont know what the issue is, i think you people shud better go and watch TV or
Drink Beer either play bed polo with ur Friends and let another generation of Bastards born
like u peolpe are, i dont think peolpe only know fuqin faq with every faqer deserve to
interfare another peoples affairs, so better get out of da topic and watch the news, and you
will know what is happenong out there in the world, u people are just faqin arround here
James and killing innocent people, Afganhistan,Iraq,Pakistan,India, Japan, all other countries they
are non of ur faqin business, go and improve ur own society first, who da faq r u people to

7.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

interfare, beawre that all the countries will stand up against u peolpe what will u do than
where will u go then, think and think. save urself and dont faq arround otherwise u people
will be faqed.
Enough wid fff....!
Bashkar. 5/26/2005 10:07 PM
Is this true that the indian people drink the piss of a cow and u people call caow ur mom..?
whoz ur dad a bull...?
But i m interested to know abut that matter why they peolpe drink the piss do u people also
eat the shit of a cow, u dont eat cows but the wastge of a cow u people eat y is that soo.?
You people r dicusting.
James
@ James 5/26/2005 10:07 PM
I m a heavey Doper and Drinker Drugs Drugs n Drugs i live for it.

This is what you say about yourself in your profile.
Bhaskar Who let you out?

Bashkar. 5/26/2005 10:30 PM
I drink wine use drugs and eat eatable food its very Normal man,everybody does.
But tnaxx god i dont Drink piss of a cow.
STILL WE PEOPLE R BETTER THEN U.
hAVE u washed ur face with the cow piss today..?
and had a shit in ur mouth, i dont know y u people become angry if someone asks u the
reaseon y u do this, u shud be proud of ur culture and religion, what happend mann r u
ashemd (of ur own religion)of what u people doo? comeon mann give a one silly reason y
James u people do thizz haaa..?

sad bad and u people r really mad.
5/27/2005 1:00 AM
I repeat.
Who let you out?
Bhaskar
@ Crabby 5/27/2005 12:07 AM
Typical Muslim attitude, when you ppl. cannot fight at the war front, lie cowards you
secretly sneak into the adversary's teritorry and do your mischieves - terrorism!

Falling short of arguments here, you don't have to scribble anything in my scrap book.
Keep your points here! And if you don't have any, and which is clear anyway, then take a
break! :)

Rosney
bashkar 5/27/2005 12:38 AM
Stucked up on one sentense.
Comeon mann tell the world y u people do soo.
Even u people eat elephant shit am i right...?
U people are still Slaves of us Europen.
any way the answer to ur question.
Who let you out..?
James The one who fuqed u.
@ james 5/27/2005 3:42 AM
well Indian ppl not only drink da piss of cows n eat the shit n call cow their mother, they
dont eat meat and dnt allow muslims to slaughter cows in India..and this has happened a
lot of times dat slaughtering a cow in India results in blood shed n massacre of muslims in
₣ỪŘфẴП Hindu dominated areas..."they genocide da people for slaughtering the animals"..what a
culture and religion..
5/27/2005 5:26 AM
Indians drink Piss and dung. A good reason why Kashmir shud be handed over to
pakistan.

Americans eat ham burgers. A good reason to hand over texas to mexico!

Get a life loosers!!!! Offtrack signifies wrong track!

7.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Rosney
james 5/27/2005 6:10 AM
the reason vaidantis(hinduisim is not a religon its a geographical assosiation for the ppl
living near indus valley, so in a way even ppl living in pakistan assosiated with indus
civilization are hindus no matter if they are muslims, christans or hindus) call cow's there
mother has a long time ago phenonmenon behind it,

As india is always depended on there crops from ages, there was a time in history when
there was shortage of cattle to swe lands, so at that time to refrain ppl from slaughtering
animals needed for basic nessasties they put this in people's mind that you drink your
mother milk for 2 years and you respect her so much, but you slaughter your cow whoes
Akber milk you drink all your life.

so this simple logic for increasing the number of cattle later become sacred in midevil
ages. and ppl considering cows as sacred as there mother.

I think there might be some cases of piss drinking in remote part of india but definetly
nobody drinks it in general neither its there religous obligation.
Rosney 5/27/2005 7:11 AM
OK,Rosney darling...let me ask you here...Are you a cheerleader of Ku Klux Klan?

Unknown
Rosney 5/27/2005 6:23 AM
im sure when u go to India 2 meet ur friends they also give u piss 2 drink n shit 2 eat..dats
y u r in such a condition..dat u cant understand ne thing baby
₣ỪŘфẴП
5/27/2005 6:45 AM
Golden Shower

Unknown

lolz 5/27/2005 12:18 PM
@rosney che che che

well u even dunt know the history of kashmir i am sure and u here to talk ,,, lolz thats sad
dude ,,,,, but wish u best luck may be u may conviened any 10 year boy from ur words
,,,,:P

Amlon
james 5/27/2005 2:10 PM
here in europa everyone is upsted to see the oil augment and see bush cryin like a little
mommy in bruxelles durin u fart at the face of the rest of the world, be carefull the wind
could radicatly change in the next 4 years and u could be poisoned by the smell of ur
Jean - proper fart (consider this is not my vision but vision to the majorities of french ppl and 25
françois countries around europa do what ever u want with it but it s the reality)

OK, 5/28/2005 1:24 AM
So I didn't start it. Furgan, Akber, Crabby, et. al. you missed the the whole argument by
delving deep in to the well of this all piss shit - shows that you were lying from the very
beginning.

Somebody did say, that lie and fart get lost in air!!!!!

Rosney
5/28/2005 1:34 AM
James, by assuming you do drugs a lot, and assuming that drugs are illegal and the sole
fact you cant even hide your illegal acts, I can say you are an addict.

And as most addicts they never see it as a problem.

Yan So you are not entitled anymore to speak up to anyone, since you are not talking, its drugs

7.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

talking.

And about Islam: why every country that has a strong muslim movement has military
struggle???

The hindu soldiers would not be forced to kill if they did not have their nation attacked,
would they???

Just asking.

Because as far as I know of hindu history, they are never the attackers, or causers of war
for more than a thousand years now, its against their most sacred principles.

Give your final soloution for Kashmir dispute. 5/28/2005 2:07 AM
okay lets end the qurrale and sum up this disscussion.

everyone should give there final word for soloution of Kashmir problem.

I beleive since india appreciate democracy so much, then the only civilized way to end
terrorism in the reigon is by ending the dispute longing back for half a century.

The fate of kashmir should be decided acording to the wishes of Kashmiris through a
plabacite. either they want to stay part of india or become one of pakistan or they wana
Akber seek indepdence.

Its not for us to decide there fate.

Please avoid name calling and accusing anyone...

simply give your proposal for the soloution to dispute as a final word.

Akber 5/28/2005 3:31 AM
Final solution must be the fair solution and that my friend won't be accptable to you. If it is, I
should very much be surprised but I shall change my mind about Pakis.

Kashmir truely belongs to India as chosen by the then sultan of Kashmir. And India is to
give Kashmir a special status, and btw which we are giving it anyway!

@ Yen
You are right for past two millenia atleast, we have never been the agressors even if we
had the strength. Chandragupta Maurya had the most mighty empire of the time when
there was nothing like civilization in Europe. And yet he didn't annex a village!
But it's high time I guess we should change our ways if people are getting an impression
that our benignity is our cowardness.

5/28/2005 3:37 AM
One more thing, kashmiris have the right to decide their fate but this goes also for Kashmiri
Hindus who have been ousted by Pakistan sponsered terrorists. So what you are
proposing is just a cunning part of the conspiracy your country is playing. First evacuate all
Hindus and then let Muslims decide!
Laurels to the Justice of islam!!!

NO 5/28/2005 6:39 AM
Kashmir truely belongs to India as chosen by the then sultan of Kashmir.

He chose it to save his ass,their was no consensus or voting.Hindu/Budhist majority areas
Unknown might have willingly become part of India, but what about Muslim majority Kashmir valley?

7.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

5/28/2005 6:53 AM
Didn't u read my post just above?????

I thot Muslims are idiots, now I know they also have trouble readin!!

Rosney
5/28/2005 8:16 AM
KKK girl Rosney,didnt u read my profile as I asked you,i thought English is your first
language...

Unknown Habla Espagnol?

5/28/2005 8:33 AM
Dear Crabby I did? Whom are you fooling. A Non Muslim from India defending Pakistan???
That's a joke.

Rosney
5/28/2005 7:33 AM
Dear Crabby I did? Whom are you fooling. A Non Muslim from India defending Pakistan???
That's a joke.

Rosney
5/28/2005 8:37 AM
Rosney Darling...where did I defend pakistan?
In all my posts I have said let Kashmiris decide for themselves which unfortunately Indian
Govt is not allowing.If you have any idea of Indian politics you'll know that the same thing is
going on in north eastern state of Manipur.Its plain oppression,and I dont know why you
Unknown
think that Indian Govt is an angel.Anyways,sorry for namecalling earlier...

@ Rosney 5/28/2005 8:28 AM
Prat / Crabby is a hard-core Commie.
He LOVES Marxism and HATES all religions.

He LOVES Mother Russia and China and like any Commie believes that his own/every
country needs a revolution and the establishment is something to be Hated.

He HATES the fact that people believe in Religion and scorn Marxist ideology.
Bhaskar So he now likes to think of himself as a Liberal and all others are accordingly labelled.

As a consequence of all the above, he moves around with a lot of complexes and prefers to
advance his viewpoint by trolling as he really doesn't have anything to back his viewpoint.

Mr. No No No No No No No 5/28/2005 1:35 PM
the question directed to thoes ppl who think kahmir to be disputed .. like the rest of world
dose.

not to thoes who like to close there eyes to realities.

though i know bhaskar will use offensive language again but still i would more like to hear
Akber his word on Kashmir.

if he think its disputed ?? is it bhaskar??

7.20
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

What a great topic... 5/28/2005 9:17 PM
...what a wonderful debate! Really, so many great ideas so far, so many well-put point-of-
views.

I'm really quite surprised, given the current level of discussions, that none of the parts
involved has used any "ultimate" arguments so far, such as:

- Really, you think so? Well, I'm sorry, but yo'mama is fat!
- My God would kick your God's ass! Twice!
- So what your country has more bombs than mine? We are better looking!
- Man, why don't you fools realize that people who were born on this side of the river are
Daniel smarter than whoever was born on the other side? It must be something on the water!

But hey, I don't want to stop the evolution of your topic, it seems like you guys are really
making some progress. Besides, it's been a blast reading some of these posts.

Play on, boys and girls...

daniel 5/29/2005 2:57 AM
thk u :)

Jean -
françois
Akber 5/29/2005 9:38 AM
Yet another trait of Muslims! Blame others for self commited crimes. Muhammad has taken
special care not to let you ppl. get away without showing you every aspect of satan.

When did Bhaskar use offensive language? Pakistanis do use it though. Anyway, you
sound like a broken record Akber so better that you now give up on your lies.

Rosney
5/29/2005 9:58 AM
This is a nice debate...PAKISTAN and INDIA ...both r to be partially blamed for this crap
that has been going on in KASHMIR....pakistan is not that innocent that it aint helping the
MUJAHIDEEN ( islamic warriors )...it did so in 1965's which led to a war with India...but the
Indian govt. aint sincere either and its promises r not at all credible....a plebisite was to be
AichTeeQue held in KASHMIR but it has not been held yet...India therefore has played a major part in
de-stabilizing the situation in the region...the ppl of kashmir should be given the right to
decide and choose whom they wanted to rule 'em....

5/29/2005 11:31 AM
Sigh. (Yet another Pakistani spraying all over the place.)

I posted on page 4 of this thread, the obligations which Pakistan violated, obligations which
were contingent to India meeting its obligations subsequently. These are part of the UN
resolutions.

No Pakistani seems to be literate enough to read it and understand it let alone have the
moral fibre to acknowledge that
Pakistan has not met its part of the obligation FIRST as required by the UN and is therefore
at COMPLETE fault.

Here's a simplified sequence of events:
Bhaskar
1. Pakistan invaded Kashmir.
That was the start part of the problem.

2. Kashmir as a result of this invasion acceded to India.
3. India demanded that Pakistan withdraw.
Pakistan refused.
4. India went to the UN.
5. The UN asked Pakistan to withdraw all its troops and people from Kashmir so that INDIA
could hold a plebiscite.
6. Pakistan has not withdrawn as of date.

7.21
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7. In the meanwhile Pakistan split the area occupied by it. Called a small part autonomous
under the name Azad Kashmir. Absorbed the larger part within Pakistan and calls it
Northern territories. And gifted a third part to China as part of a deal with China which
constructed the Karakoram highway.

8. Now all these areas under Pakistan and Chinese control have to be handed back to
India, before India conducts the plebiscite in all of Kashmir. Both Pakistan and China refuse
to vacate.

9. Since Pakistan does not have any legal claim on Kashmir, unlike India which does have
a legal claim, Pakistan drags the issue by promoting terrorism and causing suffering and
unrest in the region.

NOW TELL ME WHO IS AT FAULT?

5/29/2005 8:24 PM
Pakistan invaded Kashmir.
That was the start part of the problem.
Which document on the UN record accepts it?

Kashmir as a result of this invasion acceded to India.
Which document on the UN record declares it?

India demanded that Pakistan withdraw.
Did India or the UN? Which document is there to support it? Let it be on the UN record.

Pakistan refused.
By which document on the UN record?

India went to the UN.
OK

The UN asked Pakistan to withdraw all its troops and people from Kashmir so that INDIA
could hold a plebiscite.
Is it India or the UN responsible to hold the Plebiscite?

Pakistan has not withdrawn as of date.
There were UN observers in Pakistan side do Kashmir as late as 70s.

In the meanwhile Pakistan split the area occupied by it. Called a small part autonomous
under the name Azad Kashmir. Absorbed the larger part within Pakistan and calls it
Northern territories. And gifted a third part to China as part of a deal with China which
Syed constructed the Karakoram highway.
Let the un decide validity of the above and pass its judgement.

Now all these areas under Pakistan and Chinese control have to be handed back to India,
before India conducts the plebiscite in all of Kashmir. Both Pakistan and China refuse to
vacate.
India is not the authority to conduct the Plebiscite.

Since Pakistan does not have any legal claim on Kashmir, unlike India which does have a
legal claim, Pakistan drags the issue by promoting terrorism and causing suffering and
unrest in the region.
Ask the UN to accept the above point of view.

Following is the link for UN search on Kashmir
http://secap174.un.org/search?q=kashmir&ie=utf8&site=un_org&output=xml_no_dtd&client
=un_org&num=10&proxystylesheet=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.un.org%2Fsearch%2Fun_org_
stylesheet.xslt&oe=utf8&imgGO.x=13&imgGO.y=20

Wake up and come out of the dream

7.22
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@Syed 5/29/2005 9:43 PM
Here you come again.

UN resolutions are resolutions of action demanded by the parties concerned as well as the
UN itself.

The UN not talking about other aspects pertaining to a situation does not support your case
in any way.

Syed you guys live in denial and your response is proof.
Let us all see how sincere you are in your representation of the Truth as you see it, or if
you are just another Pakistani liar.

Bhaskar So we'll take it one sentence at a time:

ARE YOU DENYING THAT:

Pakistan invaded Kashmir?

I want you to clearly respond to this one single question.

5/29/2005 10:06 PM
And this is what the UN said vide
DOCUMENT NO. S/726, DATED THE 21ST APRIL, 1948.

The Government of Pakistan should undertake to use its best endeavors:

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
purposes of fighting, and to prevent any intrusion into the State of such elements and
any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the State;

Bhaskar The emphasis is mine.
Thus Pakistan not only indulged in invasion but even after the passing of this resolution as
early as APRIL 1948, refused to withdraw its forces or people who occupied Kashmir.
Worse they have not
"cooperated in the maintenance of peace and order" as required of them in the same
Resoultion and have to this day abetted in intrusion of elements from outseide and
furnished material aid to those fighting in the state.

5/30/2005 1:55 AM
Just like their prophet was a sick freak and a person to deceive others and himself , so are
they. You point it out right, they are in self denial. And I pity them for this. What a fool
Muhammad has made of these poor people.

Rosney
KASHIMIR ISSUE 1 5/30/2005 1:50 AM
NIGEL KELLY happens to be a Christian and he is the head of PAKISTAN STUDIES in the
Cambridge University's International examination ...He in his book pointed out the events
as follows:

1.Princely states given right to choose any country the wanted to join in the decision was to
be based on the opinion of the ppl and as a result HYDERABAD which was the largest
state went to india although its RULER, the NIZAM OF HYDERABAD , was a Muslim
AichTeeQu
e 2.MAHRAJA Hari Singh was a Hindu but most of the 4 million inhabitants of Kashmir were
muslims.He delayed announcing the decision.In 1947 he started a campaign to drive the
muslims out of Kashmir and finally the muslims rose in rebellion.

3.Mahraja turned to India to crush the muslims , ....India previously had been given the
state of GURDASPUR which was a muslim majority area b'cuz it was the only land border

7.23
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

India could have with kashmir..... , Indian help came after mahraja went against the opinion
of the ppl and acceded to India.India sent many hundereds of thousands of troops into
Kashmir to crush the muslims...

4.Pakistan could not accept that and sent troops to help the ppl of KASHMIR get their right
.

5. Neither side was strong enough for a fight and UNO arranged for a cease fire..

6.Lord Mountbatten ,the Governor General announced that a referendum would be held
once the situation has normalized!..sadly after the death of NEHRU the Indian governtment
refused to arrange for a referendum saying it had complete right over kashmir..

5/30/2005 1:52 AM
JUNAGADH was a non-muslim majority state with a muslim ruler..but it went to india
in accordance with the wishes of the ppl of the state...
Hyderabad was a non-muslim majority state with a muslim ruler...but it went to india
in accordance with the wishes of the ppl of the state!
Therefore,in every state the opinion of the masses was the final decision
,irrespective of what the ruler wanted and PAKISTAN accepted that...BUT in
KASHMIR where the majority of the population was MUSLIM and the RULER was a
HINDU the India GOVT. did not allow the state to accept the decision of the public
because it did not favor India...so who did the injustice????...who is responsible for
De-Stabilizing the situation???...
WHY IS THE INDIAN GOVT. NOT READY TO ACCEPT THAT A REFRENDUM SHOULD
AichTeeQu BE HELD TO KNOW WHAT THE PPL OF KASHMIR WANT??....THE ANSWER IS
e SIMPLE!.....THE INDIAN GOVT. KNOWS THAT THE PPL OF KASHMIR WANT TO BE A
PART OF PAKISTAN AND THEREFORE THE INDIAN GOVT. IS MAKING A FUSS!!!
AND IS NOT READY TO HAVE A REFRENDUM....

JUST GO AND READ THE FACTS CLEARLY AND WITH AN OPEN AND BROAD MIND
BEFORE SPITTIN' THE SHITT OUT OF YOUR MOUTH ...

ADIOS!

5/30/2005 2:08 AM
Can't you guys stick to the topic?

This is about Kashmir and not about Baluchistan, Afghanistan, Junagadh, Hyderabad or
whether the founder of Pakistan was a true Muslim or not. It is not about Islam, any Jew or
Hindu conspiracy, how the Americans hate the Muslims, Pakistan's philosophy of
existence, or even about British rule.

Bhaskar The point of discussion now is whether Pakistan invaded Kashmir or not.

If you have anything meaningful to contribute towards that facet of the discussion do so,
else clam up.

5/30/2005 2:21 AM
Aich, go and tell these fairy tales to your children.

Rosney
@ BHASKAR 5/30/2005 3:33 AM
hey dude...this is a simple statement abt what the position was and is....i know it is not abt
PUNJAB or HYDERABAD...but my point it PAKISTAN did not invade KASHMIR...INDIA
did...that whole thingie was abt what led to this conflict and all that....INDIA sent troops
AichTeeQu first....it was all unfair...PAKISTAN did not invade the region...it sent troops to help the ppl
e of KASHMIR...not to have the area under its control!

7.24
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@ rosney!
these aint fairy tales...i might scan the pages and send them to u...then tell me whehter or
not r these FAIRY TALES for my children,which i dont have!

Bhaskar 5/30/2005 2:49 AM
bhaskar lets look at things acording to your theory.

Answer the simple question.

did america bombed hershima nagasaki killing millions of people? so dosent it deserved to
be bombed the same way?

yes they did as it was world war 2 going on and though it was wrong but this bombing
resulted in end of genocide of jews which was being taken place in europe and end the
suffering of the rest of world. beside there are 100 reasons why usa bombed heroshima
nagasaki ..

dont deviate from the topic just answer me if USA bombed heroshima and nagasaki or not.

Akber what a logic .. its you who are shying away from the arguments put forward.

kashmir dispute is unfinshed buissness of partition. Kashmir never was legitimate part of
inida.

Rosney .. what should i say to you.. i better bang my head on wall myself.

A suggestion: from further on it would be better if minimum age of particpant in these
disscussions should be above 21.

:P

5/30/2005 3:50 AM
Do you know that Kashmir acceded to India only after Kashmir was invaded by Pakistan
and that India sent in troops only after the Treaty of Accession was signed, to defend
Kashmir from Pakistan, which was now part of Inida.

Bhaskar If you have any accredited link to back your claim that Pakistan did not invade Kashmir at
all, put it up.
I'm waiting.
@ Akber 5/30/2005 2:58 AM
I thought I had covered all ground for digression in reply to the other Paki, apparently I'm
mistaken.

I see that you are now talking of WW2 and the Americans bombing Hiroshima and
Nagasaki. This apart from defining Rosney's age criteria for participation.
Bhaskar
Let me assure you that based on the ability to stick to the topic and ability to provide a
reasoned opinion with back-up , all you Paki guys display a mental age of 5.
@ BHASKAR 5/30/2005 3:49 AM
well what r u talking abt...just go and check all the facts clearly...did u not read what i
wrote?...there was no such thing as PAKISTAN attacking KASHMIR and as a result
AichTeeQue kashmir went to INDIA...read all that MAHRAJA Hari singh story again before u analyse
the situation according to ur so-called "FACTS"!
5/30/2005 3:56 AM
as for that DID u KNOW .....and the TREATY OF ACCESION thingie....i wrote in which
conditions did the MAHRAJA sign the treaty against not only the wishes of the masses but
also against what was happening...( ppl decided in which country they wanted to live )....

FURTHER INDIAN GOVT. PROMISED TO HOLD A REFRENDUM BUT EVEN AFTER 56
AichTeeQue YRS NO SUCH THING HAS BEEN HELD..JUST DUE TO THE FACT THAT INDIA IS
SURE THAT IT'LL LOOSE KASHMIR IF SUCH A REFRENDUM IS HELD!...NOT ONLY
WILL INDIA LOOSE KASHMIR BUT IT SHALL ALSO LOOSE ITS REPUTATION AS IT
SHALL BE PROVED TO ALL THAT INDIA HAD BEEN ILLEGALLY OCCUPYING THE
STATE OF KASHMIR!!!!!!!!

7.25
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Akber and his stray facts 5/30/2005 4:01 AM
Dude, you gotta get your facts straight. The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki had
nothing to do with saving the Jews. Berlim had already fallen to the Red Army, Hitler was
already dead and Germany and Italy had already surrendered. By any angle you look at it,
the war on Europe was over when the USA dropped those nukes over Japan. And the war
on the Pacific was pretty much decided as well.

The use of nuclear weapons in that context had more to do with USA flexing their muscles
to impress the USSR, in a preview of the Cold War, than anything else.
Daniel
And, by the way, the Moscow Olympics took place in 1980, not 1986. And, once again,
that mess envolving USSR, USA and Afghanistan had more to do with the context of the
Cold War than with any real ideals.

I will have to agree with Bhaskar on that one: you are better off sticking to the topic.
5/30/2005 4:57 AM
there was no such thing as PAKISTAN attacking KASHMIR and as a result kashmir went
to INDIA...read all that MAHRAJA Hari singh story again before u analyse the situation
according to ur so-called "FACTS"!

I'm eager to find out what YOU read as history.
Please, please can you present your STORY by way of any ON-LINE link?
Bhaskar
You see, I can never bring myself to believe what any of the Pakistanis say.
Since they don't stick to facts or for that matter to the topic at hand, I also always assume
that every post of theirs is an attempt to exercise their imagination and their participation
on such boards a labored exercise to further their reading comprehension skills.
Akber 5/30/2005 5:14 AM
"yes they did as it was world war 2 going on and though it was wrong but this bombing
resulted in end of genocide of jews which was being taken place in europe and end the
suffering of the rest of world. beside there are 100 reasons why usa bombed heroshima
nagasaki .."

true I am 19, but you appaer to be above 80. You are showing symptoms of aphasia -
memmory losses.???

Jews and hiroshima nagasaki?????
Rosney

My god, you pakistanians are so damn funneeeeeee
Getting serious 5/30/2005 6:20 AM
For serious readers of this thread, here's an account written by the Kashmiris themselves
complete with sources to back-up their statements.
After all wouldn't the Kashmiris want to know what happened then?...

Worth a properREAD .
Bhaskar
You would find very little difference between this account and any other well researched
accounts for that period, even on the net.
5/30/2005 7:28 AM
dude what is ur e-mail id and i'll send u the scanned copies of a pakistan studies
book,written by a BRITISHER and endorsed by the CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY!
AichTeeQue
5/30/2005 7:44 AM
I don't read Pakistani history books written by Christians (as you mentioned before editing
your post) even if they happen to be British.
I might however change my mind depending on the Church he follows.
Bhaskar

5/30/2005 8:25 AM
so u dont wanna see that..cuz u know u'll be proved wrong in no time!
AichTeeQue

7.26
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

5/31/2005 12:51 AM
"so u dont wanna see that..cuz u know u'll be proved wrong in no time!"

No because unlike in Islam, other religions give more importance to reasoing than
authority. You ppl. give authorotative arguments cuz you lack reason - not ur fault, islam is
designed this way to discourage you to think on ur own.

If you have mettle than give reason backed by evidences. Don't ask anybody to read a
Rosney "Pakistani book written by a Chritian" - whatever that is supposed to mean.
5/31/2005 1:34 AM
dude!...if reasoning is what u want ...think rationaly...WHY WOULD A MUSLIM MAJORITY
AREA BE ATTACKED BY PAKISTAN WHEN THE POPULATION WANTED TO ACCEDE
TO PAKISTAN>????????????...india invaded kashmir be'cuz it feared that if it did not do
so it SHALL loose a big state to PAKISTAN!!!!....MOST of the INDIANs never wanted
AichTeeQue PAKISTAN to flourish and therefore they took measures to ensure that PAKISTAN faces
as many problems as possible in its early years....I HOPE ROSNEY KNOWS WHAT
INDIA DID IN THE BEGINING...or would she again say MUHAMEED HAS TAUGHT THE
PPL TO LIE!
reasoning backed by evidence I said. 5/31/2005 1:43 AM
Not asking you to reason in air.

. .I HOPE ROSNEY KNOWS WHAT INDIA DID IN THE BEGINING
What are you talking about - don't beat around the bush. What is it that you want to say?
What did India do in the beginning? And what evidences you have to back ur allegation!

Rosney
@ rosney 1 5/31/2005 3:33 AM
hey ROSNEY!
I knew u would not be knowing anything abt INDO-PAK relations...ur only AIM is to
critisize MUHAMMED ,HIS RELIGION andHIS FOLLOWERS!....well dude....read it and u'll
know that the INDIAN govt. was never sincere in its sayings as subsequent events proved!

1.I have already written abt the JUNAGADH,HYDERABAD and KASHMIR fuss.....u might
have read that....

2.At the time of PARTITION there were 4 BILLION rupees in the reserve bank .which were
to be divided between the two countries...INDIA payed the first 200 million rupees and
refused to give the rest hoping that PAKISTAN would not be able to bear the burden of it
self and will soon crumble and INDIA shall take over it....it was due to GANDHI's hunger-
strike that the INDIAN govt agreed to release another 500 million rupees (this is the
reason why i preferred to use the statement in a previous message thatMOST INDIANS
DID NOT HAVE THE WISH PAKISTAN TO FLOURISH rather than INDIANS DID NOT
AichTeeQue HAVE WISH....)...the remaining 50 million rupees have still not been payed yet!

3.Partition led to PUNJAB being divided into two parts....the west punjab was a fertile land
irrigated with the help of rivers,two of the main were in EAST-PUNJAB,now in INDIA....the
rivers were controlled with the help of a series of headworks which were in INDIA..the
indian govt. promised not to interfere in the water comming into PAK......however, it soon
cut the supplies of water and a dispute arose...PAKISTAN claimed that its economy was
dependant on water and therefore under International law it had the right to
water....INDIAN GOVT. SAID THAT AS THE HEADWORKS WERE IN ITS COUNTRY IT
HAD COMPLETE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER IT WANTED TO DO WITH IT ( note it did
not refused that it is stopping the water )...THE INDIAN GOVT. NOT ONLY BROKE ITS
PROMISE BUT ALSO THE INTERNATIONAL LAW regarding such situations....WORLD
BANK had to interfere and this dispute was solved in 1959 when 8 developed countries
sent aid for making of various schemes for water usage ......
@rosney 2 5/31/2005 3:34 AM
.Pakistan needed armed forces...it was decided that they shall be split into
44%:36%...most of the supplies did not arrive at times and when they did they were mostly
obsolete or damaged...
AichTeeQue 5.Pakistani railway system ran on COAL which had to be imported from INDIA in the
beging...the INDIAN govt. used to sell the coal at 3 times the price it sold to other
countries...most probably to crush the economy of PAKISTAN...

7.27
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6.REFUGEES were a problem for both countries...INDIAN PPL started a campaign of
killing the muslims to make space for refugees comming from PAKISTAN...although
muslims also committed such acts they were not as brutual and widespread as the ones
from the HINDU AND SIKHS.....Many HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANISATIONS PROTESTED
TO THIS and as a result martial law was to be claimed in many cities of INDIA to control
this brutual slander!...

This is a long story....try reading any good book ,written by a known historian abt the
events in the sub-continent between 1946-1955.....and u'll know how mean these Indians
WERE!...
5/31/2005 3:59 AM
You Idiot!

I mean what did India do in the beginning that has something do with kashmir issue and
that is what my question is about. Don't give me the hitory of India.

Rosney
5/31/2005 4:09 AM
jerk off!

I KNOW WHAT U WERE ASKIN' FOR...JUST GIVING U A GLIMPSE OF WHAT THE
AichTeeQue SITUATION WAS AND HOW UN-SINCERE THE INDIANS WERE....AND THEY R NOT
SINCERE NOW ON THE KASHMIR ISSUE...CUZ IF THEY R SINCERE....THEY'LL
LOOSE KASHMIR AND ALONG WITH IT ,INDIA'S LONG FOUGHT REPUTATION!
5/31/2005 6:21 AM
yes u were giving me a glimpse and u think that i am so gullible that i'll relish down every
"fact" u mention.

india started a campaign killin gof muslims and that is why pakistan is a secular country
today with 1% hindus and india is the fanatic hindu state with 16% muslim pop. and 5% of
other minorities!! great carry on! We are believing in every word you write.

Rosney
Rosney darling 5/31/2005 6:29 AM
I havent got my answer yet...how come a great American (redneck) ptartiot is supporting a
country that your Govt treats like shit?
Unknown

crabby 5/31/2005 8:43 AM
"....treats like shit"
u guys hav 4gotten dat rosney likes eating shit and drinkin piss wid her
Indian friends dats y she is supporting da country which is treated like shit by her country
govt. ....oh yeah babe!! we can smell dat shit n piss dat is in u for otha religions frm ur
₣ỪŘфẴП posts...
its quite smelly here..
but go on babe!!
Furgan, Crabby 5/31/2005 7:53 AM
Yeah nice answers to India and Kashmir issue. And they say that India is not sincere!!

btw coutry you are talking about crabby happens to be ur country - what do you want me to
respond with to a blood sucking leach who preys upon the nation who feeds him!

Well clearly you have lost the argument!! So will Pakistan loose PoK finally - truth triumphs.
And I love to see the tiny instances of that here in our discussions.
Rosney
5/31/2005 8:35 AM
yes Rosney, India is my country, but unlike a redneck racist like u, I dont wear my
nationalism on my sleeves...and I have every right to protest any decision of the Indian
Govt that goes against the people....what do you think of Chomsky,he's not American...or
Unknown what about Profesor Churchill,from U Colorado,Boulder who oppenly challenged the
hegemony and oppression of the American Govt,so they are also leaches?

7.28
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

5/31/2005 9:01 AM
"yes Rosney, India is my country, but unlike a redneck racist like u, I dont wear my
nationalism on my sleeves...and I have every right to protest any decision of the Indian
Govt that goes against the people"

I told u not to vomit this particular crap bcuz position of India on kashmir has been much
more clear than pakistan. Despite that ur support for Pakistan is ur soft corner for ur
muslims bros. living there and desire to bring yet another area under the sick rules of
sharia.
Rosney
First of all there has been no decision to protest - and u r protesting what??
Rosney 5/31/2005 10:14 AM
Are you blind?
This is the millionth time I am saying that I havent supported Pakistan,and said that its upto
Kashmiris to decide, u r automatically assuming that Kashmiris are same as
Indians....actually u racist people only know black or white right... ...

also what about prof Churchil as I mentioned in my last post...now,u'll say that he's also a
Muslim...
Unknown
This is what he said on 9/11

"Some People Push Back
On the Justice of Roosting Chickens"

now go on ranting...
5/31/2005 10:56 AM
u r automatically assuming that Kashmiris are same as Indians

And that's perfectly right.
Kashmir is an integral part of India as per the constitution of India.
So they are as much Indian as any Indian from any other part of India.
Bhaskar
All Kashmiris who live under Indian control have an Indian passport and can freely call
themselves Indian and so will people in other parts of Kashmir as they come under Indian
control.
5/31/2005 12:04 PM
yah by force,u can say they are Indians, but how long can oppressing tactics last?USSR's
oppression strategy broke it into pices,if the Indian Govt doesnt change same is gonna
Unknown happen here,just wait and watch.
5/31/2005 1:00 PM
Still dreaming of a USSR style revolution for the world?
You do have a sense of displaced reality and misplaced understanding don't you?
Now how many people have indicated that to you of late...?

Oppression? You must be joking.
The Army definitely does some kick-ass to maintain peace and to ensure that infiltration
into Indian administered Kashmir is kept out. That is better for the sake of peace rather
Bhaskar than the way these terrorists seem to be bombing themselves out elsewhere.

I wish the Indian Army showed some OPPRESSION in your native Bengal where your
stupid commie ungrateful politicians have facilitated infiltration of 10 million Bangladeshis
over the years into India.
5/31/2005 2:13 PM
he he monkey man in action again....ever read Human Right Watch's report on army
atrocities in Kashmir on common men?Dude,why dont u do some reading in stead of
Unknown acting your Lord's favorite monkey all the time...
5/31/2005 2:34 PM
Bhaskar
5/29/2005 10:06 PM
And this is what the UN said vide
DOCUMENT NO. S/726, DATED THE 21ST APRIL, 1948.

7.29
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Syed
Following is the link for the resolutions of the UN and the list of resolutions pertaining to
Kashmir.

http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions.html
Resolution 38 January 17 48
Resolution 39 January 20 48
Resolution 47 April 21 48
Resolution 51 June 22 48
Resolution 80 March 14 50
Resolution 91 March 30 51
Resolution 98 December 23 52
Resolution 122 January 24 57
Resolution 123 February 21 57
Resolution 126 December 02 57
Resolution 209 September 04 65

No doubt the paragraph you have pasted is a part of the resolution 47 of April 21 1948 or
document S/726. While the resolution requires of Pakistan to withdraw its civilians and
tribesmen it requires India to withdraw its armed forces. Nowhere in the following
documents is it implied that the tribesmen and the civilians have not been withdrawn.

Resolution 98 of December 52 (S/2883) notes with gratification that the United Nations
representative has reported that the governments of India and Pakistan have accepted all
but two of the paragraphs of his twelve-point proposals. Notes that agreement of plan of
demilitarization of the state of Jammu and Kashmir has not been reached because the
governments of India and Pakistan have not agreed on the whole of paragraph 7 of the
twelve point proposals:

5/31/2005 2:35 PM
The UN does not accept the hitherto stand of India that Kashmir is its integral part.
Resolution 122 of 24 January 1957 (S/3779) reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution 91
(1951) and declares that the convening of a constituent assembly as recommended by the
General Council of the all Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and any action that
assembly may have taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and
affiliation of the entire state or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in
support of any such action by the assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the state
in accordance with the above principle;

The stand of the United Nations which has been repeated in every resolution is that the
Syed final disposition of the state of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with the
will of the people express through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite
conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

It took a little while searching out all the resolution and reading them just to check if I may
be wrong. Boy! Accept the fact that the Kashmir is a disputed territory and needs amicable
solution.
@ Syed 5/31/2005 11:08 PM
You are insincere in your arguments.
I do have all the UN resolutions on Kashmir at hand, so let us not deviate from what has
been pointed out by me.

You say:

While the resolution requires of Pakistan to withdraw its civilians and tribesmen

I'm glad you accept this in the first place.
The resolution requires Pakistan to withdraw all its nationals which includes the Pakistani
Bhaskar army.

So do not interpret nationals as civilians to suit your convenience.

Let your country do this first as part of its primary obligation and then come to the table
with the rest of its arguments.

======== End of Story ==============

7.30
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6/1/2005 2:52 AM
The resolution is composed of two main headings
A. Restoration of peace and order
B. Plebiscite.
The heading A is made up of two clauses
1. The government of Pakistan should undertake …………
2. The government of India should………………
The clause 1 and sub clause (a) states “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, and to prevent any intrusion into the state of
Syed such elements and any furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the state:”

Nowhere the above sub clauses suggest of any Pakistani army men crossing over the
cease fire line. I am no expert in law or the international relations. But I can understand the
implications of using the correct words and phrases. Than it was Cease fire line and now it
is Line of Control. The change is significant………continued
6/1/2005 2:56 AM
Continued…………
Likewise if you don’t specifically introduce the required words the law does not recognize
the meanings you want to imply. Not only that the same words or the phrases can be
interpreted giving different meanings and can be argued in the court of law. If there is no
mention of the words troops, forces, army etc., there was no regular army. Above all there
has never been any formal written complaint from India that the withdrawal is not taking
place. If the representatives from your side were not able to put on record such documents
to support your stand, it is the weakness on the part of your representatives.
Syed
In case of Pakistan no where the words implying the presence of regular fighting forces
has been mentioned while as it appears in the following paragraph there are and were
regular fighting forces on the Indian side of Kashmir. …………continued
6/1/2005 2:55 AM
Continued…………
While the All Jammu and Kashmir National Conference tried through a bill of parliament to
annex the state to Indian union our representatives were able to put on record that the
situation is not recognizable to the United Nations.

Under the heading government of India should….
The cause c and the following sub clauses say;
(i) The presence of troops should not afford any intimidation or appearance of intimidation
to the inhabitants of the state;
(ii) That as small a number as possible should be retained in forward areas;
Syed (iii) That any reserve of troops which may be included in the total strength should be
located within their present base area.

For your information one of the resolutions has clearly specified the number of troops each
side can station across the cease fire line. The whole discussion can be summed up and
concluded that there is a dispute between India and Pakistan called dispute of Kashmir
and needs to be resolved by the concerned parties like civilized human beings.
@ Syed 6/1/2005 5:18 AM
I keep repeating that you have problems with English comprehension and here's further
proof:

This is what the UN resolution says:

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, and to prevent any intrusion into the state of such elements and any
furnishing of material aid to those fighting in the state

Bhaskar There is no ceasefire and Line of Control here.
The said UN resolution demands that all Pakistani nationals and that includes the army
withdraw from Kashmir

This means you got to remove all your people, army included, lock stock and barrel from
Azad Kashmir, Northern Areas as well as get the Chinese to move out of the territory gifted
to you by them subsequently.

7.31
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

When the UN says Jammu and Kashmir, it means the entire State of Jammu and Kashmir
and not the Indian administered area.

As usual your entire understanding of what you have to do is flawed as is the case of all
Pakistanis even when the UN resolutions stares at them in the face.

I have to but marvel your illiteracy, ignorance and the extent to which you people live in self
denial and delusion arising out of military propaganda.

These are simple sentences to understand. If you can't understand this consult a lawyer.
@ Syed 6/1/2005 5:27 AM
I also notice that you did not reply to my question HERE .

So why don't you be man enough to accept the fact openly that Pakistan invaded Kashmir,
Bhaskar a statement which you refuted blindly earlier?
@ Syed 6/1/2005 5:32 AM
In case you even dream of shamelessly denying here's a Kashmiri ACCOUNT of events as
it took place then.
Bhaskar
:d 6/1/2005 10:45 AM
I have seen your post and a kind of busy right now will reply later. In the mean time please
learn how to be polite and respectful to others.

Syed
6/7/2005 7:22 PM
I have listed all the UN resolutions give the link and scribed how I interpret these
resolutions with the English I am able to understand. What I have always understood is
that Kashmir is not an integral part of India it is a dispute and needs to be resolved by a
plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations and let the people of Kashmir decide of
their future.

I am proud that my country men have shown their traditional hospitality and respect to the
Syed visiting Indian political leaders. For decades the media has been projecting Mr. Advani as a
radical hawk and anti Pakistan. Do you see the truth now? You cannot run away from the
logic. Let us wait and see the fall out of the visit of the leaders from the Indian held
Kashmir.

6/8/2005 5:30 AM
Things seem to be simple:

1) some muslims come to India, Hindus are nice people and wellcome them.

2) muslims become more numerous and want the hindus land, saying its theirs given by
their God, hindus disagree since it has allways been hindu land, since milleniums ago.

3) muslims gets pissed off and start molesting the hindus.
Yan
4) muslims start crying saying that hindus started it.

XD
@ Syed 6/9/2005 4:29 AM
Is this your considered reply to my post after 7 days.
Isn't this the second thread on Kashmir on which you are beating a retreat in this very
community?

You come to make inane points and when pushed to a corner, flee the scene like any
intellectual coward.

Bhaskar You questioned the very invasion of Kashmir by Pakistan. In polite conversation that is
called living in denial. Otherwise I would say you are a liar.

Enuff said.
==============xxxxxxxxxxxxx============

7.32
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6/10/2005 6:47 AM
Not a single leader of Indian occupied Kashmir is in favour of Indian stance. All the leaders
except one are on a trip to Pakistan are for the solution of the Kashmir problem. The only
leader who did not come has a harder view and does not like to travel on a passport which
terms him an Indian national. You say it is cross border terrorism we call it freedom fight.
All the UN resolutions are very specific about the plebiscite under the auspices of the
United Nations and let the people of Kashmir decide of their future.

When different people have different interpretations for the same statement it is called
dispute. The history is the best judge and the truth cannot be kept hidden for always. 100
percent of the Indian leaders visiting Pakistan recently agree that there is a dispute
between the two countries on Kashmir. Recently Mr. Lal Kishan Advani has concluded his
visit to Pakistan and presently Mr. Mani Shanker Ayar is here on a trip to Pakistan.
Syed
You people have turned against your own leader Mr. Lal Kishan Advani. He is your leader
of the opposition and leader of the Bhartia Janata Party the ruling party of India until the
last general elections. Your people consider at fault Mr. Advani because he praised the
founder of Pakistan Mr. Mohammad Ali Jinnah and termed him a secular person. The
controversy has risen to such an extent that Mr. Advani has resigned from the president
ship of the opposition party. For the last 57 years you people have been hoping in vane for
a real retreat but the controversy remains there.
6/10/2005 8:10 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2001727.stm India is believed to have
deployed about 750,000 troops in Kashmir, facing some 250,000 Pakistani troops along
the Line of Control. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry said India should desist from "blatant
war-mongering" and instead focus on peacefully resolving the Kashmir problem.
Syed
6/10/2005 8:42 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4018313.stm From behind a bullet-proof screen at
the public rally in Srinagar, Mr Singh also announced a $5bn development package for the
region……………… Our correspondent says a number of people in the crowd were
shouting slogans demanding jobs before peace. He says many Kashmiris recall a huge
economic package promised by prime minister Rajiv Gandhi 20 years ago that never
Syed materialised.
6/10/2005 9:14 AM
http://newsfromrussia.com/world/2004/11/18/57174.html Indian Prime Minister Manmohan
Singh last week promised to reduce troops in the India-held Kashmir, though he failed to
make it clear how many troops would be removed. As the first step, a battalion of Indian
paratroopers left the town of Anantnag on Wednesday.

Results 1 - 10 of about 611,000 for troops kashmir (links on google) Results 1 - 10 of about
Syed 868,000 for troops kashmir Millions of links on different search engines term Kashmir as a
deputed of held territory. Don’t you think the matter needs to be resolved according to the
wishes of the Kashmir people?
@ Syed 6/10/2005 10:35 AM
You said Pakistan did not invade Kashmir.
I asked you to back it up whilst I presented links of the invasion.

If that is not a blatant lie on your part, what is?

I spoke of the UN resolutions which spoke of requiring Pakistani withdrawal of all its
nationals from Kashmir. You have no reply to that, and your army has occupied part of
Kashmir and generated hatred not only within Pakistan but within India, now for over 5
decades.
This is the legacy of your generation of Pakistan to the sub-continent.

Bhaskar Is it not enough that your country's leaders were responsible for the butchering of millions
of Hindus and the partition of India?

Haven't you as a country no shame promoting terrorism, a fact you can no longer refute, as
Kashmiris themselves have acknowledged that Pak was responsible for supply of arms
and terrorist training.

You have put up various links. To which point of mine are you replying?
Me thinks, you are on your own medicated trip and need professional help.

7.33
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6/10/2005 6:53 PM
Ok you win and I loose if you feel satisfied.
You say Pakistan invaded and India retaliated because of the fight of the two countries the
area is disputed. The sufferers are the Kashmir people. The issue needs to be resolved.
What proper venue is there except the United Nations? Ask your government to take the
matter to the UN and let the experts decide who violated the UN resolutions most. I know
Pakistan is always open for the discussion; it is India who has kept the issue unresolved.
You cannot enslave people even if you keep 750000 troops there. You cannot kill each and
every Kashmiri the retaliation is in the form of freedom fight as we put it, and terrorism as
Syed you accuse. Key phrase as always is “All the UN resolutions are very specific about the
plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations and let the people of Kashmir decide of
their future.”
Do you agree?
6/10/2005 7:15 PM
Bhasker don’t you think it is a joke; you want Pakistan to withdraw its troops and in
response Manmohan Singh is obliging you. Again there a million links announcing India
withdrawing its troops form the disputed territory.

Syed
6/10/2005 7:33 PM
Is it not enough that your country's leaders were responsible for the butchering of millions
of Hindus and the partition of India?

The butchering as you term it was on the Indian side soon after the partition of India in
1947, there was no rioting on the Pakistan territory. It was instigated by the Indian radical
leaders, Gandhi protested to it and as a result he was assassinated by an Indian radical.
Syed Whether a himdu dies or a muslim dies it is the loss of human life. You have no option but
to agree with me.

6/10/2005 8:54 PM
“plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations and let the people of Kashmir
decide of their future”

I did not carve the above phrase it is part of different clauses to the UN resolutions.
Syed Imagine what type of world it will be if every country starts disobeying and ignoring the UN.
@ Syed 6/10/2005 8:43 PM
The root of the problem for Pakistan is Kashmir.

1. Vacate from Kashmiri territory.

2. Stop supporting terrorism in Kashmir as well as other parts of India.

3. Make the entire Pakistan Occupied Kashmir area as one administrative zone.
This should comprise Northern Areas, Azad Kashmir as well as China occupied Northern
Areas.

4. Bring in democratic processes to the area. Even if the rest of Pak themselves prefer to
be ruled by Army dictators.

5. Stop your hate filled domestic propaganda on Kashmir within Pak.

Bhaskar 6. Improve social development indices in Pak administered Kashmir in a hurry.

7. Secure the international borders of Kashmir from Afghanistan and China as well as the
rest of Pakistan so as to prevent non-Kashmiri inflows.

8. Stop supporting terrorists who now call themselves terrorists.

9. Treat all Kashmiris with respect, that includes Kashmiri politicians on the Indian side who
would like to visit POK. You entertain separatist terrorists in Pak but refuse to speak to the
democratically elected leaders of Kashmir?

10. Kashmris just want peace in the area.
Their local industry and employment opportunities have been destroyed by Pak's terrorist
activities.

7.34
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

11. It is none of your concern as long as the Indian army stays on its side of the border
ensuring law and order and peace!

12. Kashmir and Kashmiris have no relation to Pakistan. So don't cross your limits by
expressing concern on internal issues of other countries to the point of being a nuisance.

You want Kashmiris to be happy.
Step aside and don't poke your nose.
I'm glad you admit that Pak does not have a case or locus standi when it comes to
Kashmir.
I think you guys should stop living a lie.
There are enough young Pakistanis who have now interacted with Indians and see the lie
perpetrated by the Pak regime.
India bashing forms the staple diet of local Pakistani politics. Hate building and jehadi talk
should stop within Pak.

Kick out the army and mullahs from power.
Bring in democracy in Pak first!
6/12/2005 7:10 PM
I don’t know how to address you; young fellow or dear old man because you prefer to hide
your real face behind the abstract graphics in place of your photo. Every question you
raised is already answered earlier here in this very topic. This stalemate has been there for
the last 57 years and will go on like same in the future.

Syed Let us wait and see what results in ignoring the UN resolutions, and how the freedom fight
and terrorism is redefined in future by the hegemonistic and bully regimes.
6/22/2005 12:53 PM
give ur suggestions for resolving Kashmir dispute

₣ỪŘфẴП
6/22/2005 1:54 PM
give ur suggestions for resolving Kashmir dispute

₣ỪŘфẴП
6/22/2005 2:38 PM
The scenario i am about to suggest is definately flawed, but in this tangled web, many see
it as the closest we can get to ideal:

Both armies withdraw and Kashmir (this includes azad kashmir) becomes a neutral zone
under UN control for a period of 30 years. This allows for an entire generation to grow up
without being influenced by propoganda by the 2 countries and prevents terrorism. After
the end of the 30 years, while Kashmir is still under UN control a plebiscite is held to
determine whether they want to join India or Pakistan.

Problems with this:
* Theres no garuntee that either pakistan or india is noit going to try and send in agents or
troops secretly. remember operation gebralter? (sadly that was pakistani)

*Put yourself in the shoes of these Kahmiris. After leaving for 30 years in peace, an entire
generation has to make the choice of joining a country and will become embroiled in the
Kamil nightmarish political situation. If i were one of them, Id want to remain free!

*If the Kashmiris declare that they want to be free, all hell will quite literally break loose.
imagine what india and pakistans reaction would be.

so i know that this panning is obviously flawed, but i thought i should show it here. what do
you guys think (i request that only people who arent biased reply to this)? can you help try
and solve the obvious problems of this plan?

Of course the ideal situation is Indo-Pak reunification, but i wont even go down that road as
I know how so many people feel about that.

For now, we should try and solve the problem while also going towards frienship.

7.35
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6/22/2005 6:07 PM
There is an even simpler one!

If Pakistan withdraws completely, army, civilians et al, given the fact that they are illegal
occupiers anyway, the problem will no longer be a problem!
Bhaskar
Chew over it!
6/23/2005 2:00 AM
bhaskar, i am trying to come up witha solution both countries accept, and im sure but youre
actign biased. i asked to be helped on this, not to be snubbed by biased individuals.
and one could also tell india to also withdraw completely, but this is just going to make ppl
angry
Kamil
why cant both countries withdraw?
6/23/2005 2:20 AM
Pakistan is the next taliban. Lesser territory it has, the better it is for the world. Don't give
Kashmir to Pakistan.

Rosney
6/23/2005 2:28 AM
For starters: Try improving your english.
Secondly, what more could I expect from you? I try suggesting a peaceful solution and in
you come! Whats more, since when have you been so concerned about India and
Pakistan?
Kamil Are you determined to tear this community to shreds with your incessant hate-mongering?
You are quite annoying. Go and stand in the corner as a punishment, since that what
troublesome little brats get!

6/23/2005 3:59 AM
OK! so now I get why all this bitching 'bout my English. Probably because all this while I
have been using lower case for the first alphabets in islam, taliban, muslim, etc.

That's intentional - check it out in all my posts. I am concitent with that. My way of showing
contempt for islam, quran, taliban, etc.

By the way, is that bothering you?
Rosney
6/23/2005 5:32 AM
No, what bothers me is your intolerance, not towards religion, but towards an entire
country and your hate-mongering. making posts like dont give pakistan anything doesnt
help anyone. neither do posts like "Kamil loves Saddam".
grow up!
Kamil and by the ay, its not your spelling that i was talking about. read that post again and you'lls
ee its incorrect english.
Well, 6/23/2005 6:32 AM
I don't think I need to learn English from Pakistanis.

Rosney
6/23/2005 5:57 AM
The same way we don't need to learn about hate, and most of all, our conflicts from people
like you.
Kamil

7.36
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

6/23/2005 8:33 AM
"The same way we don't need to learn about hate from people like you"

Yes you have quran to learn it from, and mahomet's life to exemplify it!!

Rosney
6/23/2005 7:36 PM
@rosney
be what you are ..dont go aplogizing in other communities and spreading shit in others..

@bhaskar
and why shud the pakistani army leave kashmir..? just temme that? it was india who forced
into kashmir at the tyme of partition...more than 80% of the kashmiris are muslims and
kashmir is geographically contigious to pakistan...so why did india had prob wtih that..and
Sabih
u say there are terrorists in kashmir.. hahaha..all jihadis are not terrorists... and i dun want
to even mention the doings of the indian army in kashmir..
why not the indians just hold a plebicite UNDER the supervision of UN?? we shaall
see then..
6/24/2005 5:21 AM
@roseney
my god, you are dense! do i have to broadcast the fact that im not muslim over BBC or
something so that itll finally sink in? and whats more, be honest, how many religions do
you know that are fuly peaceful? or their followers?
during the crusades, the christians were the terrorists, before that, when christ was
crucified, it was the jews and today its the muslims!
if theres ones thign id have hoped humanity wopuld have learned, its that "fighting fire with
Kamil fire" only leads to destruction and chaos.
but you, my dear, are living proof that taht hope is far from becoming a reality.

and how dare you stir up such a ruccus in the UN community? go start an anti-islamic
community why dont you? but dont give grief to an organization that has already had its
"prestiege" destroyed thanks to the actions of certain countries.
@Syed 6/25/2005 2:39 PM
Can you give me latest UN resolution on Kashmir?

Can you provide me one single line in any UN resolution which says "India's occupation of
Kashmir is illegal"

Can you quote me any UNSC(permanent mem) country's official website telling India to
hold plebiscite in Kashmir?

Can you quote similar websites of non-arabic countries?

Some time ago on Pak-India discussion forum someone accused India of holding fake
elections in Kashmir, and claimed that no country acknowledged it.
I provided that guy official statments of G5 countries praising India for holding election in
Kashmir.

@Crabby
Prashant Dude, admit it, you have a crush on Rosney.
You just wanna go against her on everything.

Anyways assuming that you are making proper posts answer these questions:
How are elections in Kashmir are not allowing Kashmir to deciede everything for
themselves?

WHY DO KASHMIRIS WANT INDEPENDENCE?
I mean like do you want independence?
Partition happened 60 years ago, so is it their dream which was not fulfilled.

Why suddenly in 1989?
Did they woke up some day and realise "OOOPS, LOOKS LIKE WE FORGOT TO ASK
FOR PLEBISCITE"?

7.37
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

I don't think you as an Indian you would be buying pak's theory of "rape and killing by
Indian army".
6/25/2005 3:25 PM
oho...as for your information..the kashmiris want a plebicite since partion.. UN has been
doing nothing to solve the Kashmir issue..
and common..now.. dont give stupid and lame excuses like " why did they wake up in
1989?".. Cummon..Give me one Solid reason why you think Kashmir shud belong to india..
Sabih
I'll give you a hundred that it doesnt..and I'll prove it..and dont provide us with wrong stats..
@Sabih 6/25/2005 4:06 PM
Kashmir has only one solution, when Pakistanis will stop bothering themselves about
Kashmir.

as for your information..the kashmiris want a plebicite since partion..
As for YOUR information.. read the last sentence you wrote..dont provide us with wrong
stats..

Anyways I will give you some reasons, *India is having one of the largest muslim
Prashant population of the world.
*Shias of Kashmir don't want to go to Pakistan.
*There is a very high election turn out in buddhist and hindu areas of Kashmir.
*Formation of Kashmir will be seen as another partition, and there are 1 Billion people
sitting on the other side of border who think that Pakistan itself should never have been
formed on the first place.

@Prashant 6/26/2005 12:20 PM
ok..
I recognize that India is having one of the largest muslim populations .. but its still isnt more
than pakistan's ? is it? and talking of muslims living in india.. well you know and the world
knows that hindu muslim riots erupt at the tiniest sign of discord.. a good example is
gujrat..
secondly Kashmir still has more than 80% of the muslim population. no matter wat you ppl
say..that was a fact at partition and it is a fact now.. sure hindus want to go to india..thats
natural man..and they wanted to go towards india even at partition whilst the muslims
wanted to go to pakistan..That was why more than 10 million ppl swapped sides at
Sabih
partition.
thirdly, who said shia muslims want to side with india? can you give me some reference
please. and one other fact..even if they want to go with india..which i doubt.. there are still
masses who wud vote for pakistan or independence.
fourthly, every body knows that the billion hindus in india never wanted partition, so whats
the big deal.
Unfortunaly never 6/26/2005 4:42 PM
I dont see any resolution for that area, i just see the politician´s ignorance in the two sides,
like always the weight that matter is the economical not the humanitarian. So, two sisters
countries and your beautiful people lose in the final. The final result, i am sick to know,
Eduardo more deaths and blood.
6/26/2005 7:33 PM
@Prashant

Can you provide me one single line in any UN resolution which says "India's occupation of
Kashmir is illegal"

Presently it is a dispute. The legality vis-à-vis India and Pakistan will come when we have
settled the dispute.

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2001/sgt2270R.doc.htm

Press Release SG/T/2270R
Syed

SG/T/2270* 19 March 2001

ACTIVITIES OF SECRETARY-GENERAL IN INDIA, 15 - 18 MARCH

Secretary-General Kofi Annan flew from Bangladesh to India on Thursday,

7.38
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

15 March.

On arrival in New Delhi, he told the press that while in India, as he had done in Pakistan,
he would be urging the Government to renew dialogue on the Kashmir dispute, to reduce
tensions and build confidence. "You and Pakistan have too much in shared heritage by
way of history, as well as family and cultural ties, not to resolve your differences", he said.
"It is time to begin healing the wounds ....”
6/26/2005 7:43 PM
it is not that easy question!!! but, what one pretends, may be! Cláudia

Cláudia
@Syed 6/27/2005 3:16 AM
What happened dude?
I can't find a single reference of Kofi Annan talking about
illegal occupation of India over Kashmir
or
holding the long due plebiscite in Kashmir
or
asking India to stop killing innocent Kashmiris in Kashmir.

Prashant All he said is:
"There are Security Council resolutions which are important, but they are not self-
enforcing", he said. "The parties have to come together through dialogue to implement
whatever agreements are taken, which the Security Council resolutions could bear up."
So no illegal occupation, no forcing plebiscite, no killing of Kashmiris by Indian Army.

Please pull up relevent links according to the demand.
@Sabih 6/27/2005 3:26 AM
but its still isnt more than pakistan's?
Is it somekind of competition of populations?
Wait for a few more years, and the rate by which muslim population is growing we will soon
surpass indonasia.

a good example is gujrat..
I have got enough friends from Pakistan who tell me enough riot stories(shia-sunni in Gilgit
this year jan). I have talked to girls on phone who were telling me why they were in
Islamabad from gilgit(to their cousins)
Prashant In India if muslims die then its an issue, but Pakistan only and only muslims will die.

Please don't pretend as if we don't know anything.

there are still masses who wud vote for pakistan or independence.
Oh yeah, who gives you these facts? Or you make them up on your own. Can you give me
the demographic distrobution of Kashmir(religion wise)
Also give me your reasons to believe that Hindus and laddhakhis will vote for Pakistan.
6/27/2005 7:00 AM
Hey Prashant, every UN resolution regarding Kashmir states that the Kashmiri people
should the right to self-determination through a plebiscite.

It is a well known fact that India is the one preventing that plebiscite from taking place.
Your bullshit claims regarding terrorism are just attempts to distract the world. You are
OhReally aggressors and you are occupying land illegally!!!!

Face it!
6/27/2005 8:28 AM
HELLO?! How is argueing like this going to get us anywhere?! For Gods sake, lets talk
SOLUTIONS not ACCUSATIONS! And telling each other to "withdraw their forces and get
lost" is NOT a solution!
I've already offered one, so now I ask you all to help build on that or offer others.
Kamil STOP ACTING LIKE OUR IDIOTIC GOVERNMENTS ARE, OR ONE DAY YOU'LL
BECOME THOSE VERY PEOPLE, AND THE KASHMIR ISSUE WILL NEVER BE
SOLVED! WORK TOGETHER PEOPLE!

7.39
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@OhReally & Sabih 6/27/2005 10:17 AM
It is a well known fact

There are still masses who wud vote
Can't you people talk in a manner to believe which we don't have to make assumptions.

For example to talk to you everything about Kashmir, we first have to accept your facts
presented in semantic sugar "Its a well known fact that all Indians are bastards"
OR
Prashant "Whole world agrees to the demand of Kashmiris"

So I am not answering anything which starts with these kinds of assumptions,
meanwhile you answer the following questions:
Why is Pakistan not giving the right of self-determination to Balcuhis?
Why is Pak army killing and raping women in Balchistan?
Why did Pakistan forcefully annexed Baluchistan during the time of independence?
@Prashant 6/28/2005 8:15 AM
oho...
Where do u come up with such good stinking bullshit ideas??? (You wud make a good
director in Bollywood )

who told she there were shia sunni riots in Gilgit? sure u inveted that up..
Who told you pakistan annexed Baluchistan? get your facts and ass staright.. the "jirga" (if
u know wat that is, which i doubt) of baluchistan decided in favour of pakistan..
who told u pakistan army was slaughtering baluchis..or where did u read that bullshit..in the
newspaper called "shitting rumours"?
Sabih and .. u cant change the demographics of Kashmir..watever u say ..that is a muslim
majority area and will be.. you dont have anything more to say thats why u r changing to
other topics..
and i know that - u know that.. that the kashmiris would always vote for Pakistan..thats why
u r so pissed up and not holding a plebicite...
and dont talk abt the annexing thing bcoz pakistan never annexed any state or province.. it
Was India which annexed Hydrabed..It was india which forcibly took Junagadh.. and it was
india who forcibly invaded kashmir..

6/28/2005 1:10 PM
You wud make a good director in Bollywood
Sorry but lollywood's offer is more attractive.

who told she there were shia sunni riots in Gilgit? sure u inveted that up..
I have no idea if it was published in the newspapers of Pakistan, but I have a very close
friend in pakistan(isb) and in january'05 she had her cousin from her village (gilgit) because
shia-sunni riots broke out. I even talked to her and she explained me all these things and
Prashant history of shia-sunni tension in gilgit(simultaneously giving me the privilage of one of the
few guys who talked to her).

Anyways, I haven't checked the internet for that news incident, but if you want I will do that
too(though don't hope to find much)
6/28/2005 10:26 PM
yeah you do that

Sabih
6/28/2005 10:26 PM
Prashant, you have lovely sources, I must say!

Plus, if you sling mud at other people, you should be prepared to get dirty yourself! We are
not diplomats...I will swear at you all I want. We Muslims have to take a lot of shit from you
people as well, but you don't hear us crying about it. If you look past the Indian bastard
thing, you will realize that I have solid and rational arguments. You have no answer, none
OhReally of you, therefore, you are using this treacherous trick of yours to avoid the topic altogether.

Plus, why are you people violating the Indus Water Basin Treaty and building a dam in
Kashmir?

7.40
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@Sabih 6/29/2005 4:57 AM
Violence errupted coz Shia leader killed
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/09/top2.htm
Cerphew imposed
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/10/top4.htm
Judicial probing into the case:
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/12/top6.htm
Cerphew imposed in Skardu:
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/14/top5.htm
Shia leader laid to rest:
Prashant http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/15/top9.htm

Army was deployed in Gilgit:
http://www.dawn.com/2005/01/28/nat13.htm
Though cerphew was lifted soon, but people didn't returned back until mid-feb.

Yeah I did that
6/29/2005 5:09 AM
First of all you have to accept that no society (in Indian sub-continent) is safe from
sectarian violence.

There were hindu-muslim, hindu-sikh (yeah it happens here also), sikh-muslim, and all
kinds of riots.

You just can't accuse us of jeopardising so many people(equivalent to another Pakistan)
here in India.
India would be like a hell if actually we were not keeping muslims well.

@OhReally
but you don't hear us crying about it.
*smile on his face*

why are you people violating the Indus Water Basin Treaty and building a dam in Kashmir?
Prashant Why are you violating document of accession?
And wait a min, I am not doing it for the first time, so your expected reply is:
Kashmir was a muslim dominated area, and it should have been gone to Pakistan, but that
hindu rular gave it to India.
Well then we have our own reasons for making dam in Kashmir(like technically it doesn't
violate Indus Water Treaty)
Second thing, we were planning to void(formally) do it long ago at the time of Kargil war,
but then we didn't do it.

Finally the actual reason I think we are creating a fuss of it, because soon there would be a
oil pipeline running through Pakistan, and we don't want them to use it as a card against
us(for kashmir or for anything).
And I know you people are not good at taking care of your own pipelines then what could I
expect you regarding India's.
6/29/2005 6:50 PM
Presently it is a dispute. The legality vis-à-vis India and Pakistan will come when we have
settled the dispute.

On arrival in New Delhi, he told the press that while in India, as he had done in Pakistan,
he would be urging the Government to renew dialogue on the Kashmir dispute, to reduce
tensions and build confidence. "You and Pakistan have too much in shared heritage by
way of history, as well as family and cultural ties, not to resolve your differences", he said.
"It is time to begin healing the wounds ....”

http://www.un.org/Docs/sc/unsc_resolutions.html
Resolution 38 January 17 48
Syed Resolution 39 January 20 48
Resolution 47 April 21 48
Resolution 51 June 22 48
Resolution 80 March 14 50
Resolution 91 March 30 51
Resolution 98 December 23 52
Resolution 122 January 24 57

7.41
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Resolution 123 February 21 57
Resolution 126 December 02 57
Resolution 209 September 04 65

The UN does not accept the hitherto stand of India that Kashmir is its integral part.
Resolution 122 of 24 January 1957 (S/3779) reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution 91
(1951) and declares that the convening of a constituent assembly as recommended by the
General Council of the all Jammu and Kashmir National Conference and any action that
assembly may have taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and
affiliation of the entire state or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in
support of any such action by the assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the state
in accordance with the above principle;

The stand of the United Nations which has been repeated in every resolution is that the
final disposition of the state of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance with
the will of the people express through the democratic method of a free and impartial
plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations.

More to come
6/29/2005 10:53 PM
"but you don't hear us crying about it.
*smile on his face*"

There is no need to smile, because I was referring to the language. We definitely are
pissed off about the persecution the Muslims are sufferring at the hands of the western
world and it really pisses us off that you are using the War on Terror to gain sympathy from
OhReally the rest of the world even though you people are the real terrorists.

Now, what do you have to say about these UN resolutions? This proves that you people
are forcefully occupying Muslim land!
7/1/2005 3:23 AM
@Prashant

http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2003/gashc3770.doc.htm

Press Release GA/SHC/3770 20/11/2003

Fifty-eighth General Assembly Third Committee 52nd & 53rd Meetings (AM & PM)

THIRD COMMITTEE APPROVES 10 DRAFT RESOLUTIONS ON HUMAN RIGHTS,
SELF-DETERMINATION, ELIMINATION OF RACISM ………

Deeply concerned at the continuation of acts or threats of foreign military intervention and
occupation that are threatening to suppress, or had suppressed, the right to self-
determination of peoples and nations, the Committee approved a draft resolution on the
universal realization of the right of peoples to self-determination by a vote of 88 in
Syed favour with 64 abstentions, to 3 opposed (Bhutan, India, Mauritius) (see Annex I).
The draft would have the General Assembly declare its firm opposition to acts of foreign
military intervention, aggression and occupation, and call upon those States responsible to
cease immediately their military intervention in and occupation of foreign countries and
territories.

Many speakers said it appeared that the universal principle of self-determination had been
used to refer to the specific situation between India and Pakistan. Believing that the context
that had prevailed was not appropriate or within the spirit of the universal principle of the
right to self-determination, some delegations, including Benin, Dominican Republic, Kenya,
Botswana and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines withdrew their co-sponsorship of the draft
resolution.
7/1/2005 3:28 AM
Explaining his vote, the representative of India said that the statement made by the main
sponsor – Pakistan -- while introducing the draft resolution, had challenged the unity and
territorial integrity of India. The right to self-determination must not be construed to
condone any action that would disrupt or threaten the territorial integrity of a State. India
would oppose any attempts to misuse the principle of the right to self-determination for
Syed ulterior motives.

7.42
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

The representative of Pakistan expressed his gratitude to all delegations that had
reaffirmed their commitment to the principle of self-determination. A vote for this principle
was not a vote in favour of any specific issue –- it was a vote for the principle of self-
determination -– a principle central to the United Nations Charter.

The debate turned into a debate on the human rights violations in Kashmire and the
following were
7/1/2005 3:29 AM
In favour: Albania, Algeria, Angola, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan,
Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam,
Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cameroon, Canada, Cape Verde, Chile, China, Comoros,
Congo, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cuba, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ecuador,
Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Guatemala, Honduras, Iran, Ireland, Japan, Jordan,
Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kuwait, Kyrgyzstan, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Mali, Mauritania,
Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Myanmar, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Niger,
Nigeria, Oman, Pakistan, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Qatar, Republic
Syed of Korea, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore,
Somalia, Sudan, Suriname, Swaziland, Syria, Thailand, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago,
Tunisia, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, Yemen.

All are not Arabs.

7/1/2005 3:41 AM
Terrorism starts when people in politics start tricking and forcing people in to accepting
something against the wishes of the majority. I may be insignificant but take it as a
quotation and write it down under my name.
Jaffer
Syed
7/1/2005 5:32 AM
Terrorism starts when people do not have a sound ethical grounding of what is right and
wrong.
Don't seek to justify terrorism. Certain things are simply unjustifiable and terrorism is one of
them.

For a start you may want to figure out why so many of your people blow themselves up.

This has got a lot to do with the type of governments or the lack of it that you people have
foisted upon yourselves.
This combined with hatred and bigotry based on tribal traditions and value systems that do
not fit under modern civilised society comprising of a large number of illiterates is another
Bhaskar root cause.

Obviously you guys need to reform yourselves on several fronts, political and social, this
apart from working towards developing the right attitude towards everybody in the global
community.

Get a grip of yourselves and save everybody the misery of your presence.
Having the last word through terrorism just implies that you are pathetic and have lost the
cause that you think is right, which obviously is not.
@Syed 7/1/2005 12:31 PM
You are completely misinterpreting the report.
Following are the countries who supported a draft resolution on humanity topics which
were very cleverly confusicated by Pakistani representative as resolution for Kashmir.

The representative of Brazil said he hoped the same statement would be made after the
introduction of all repeated resolutions to preclude the application of double standards
regarding this issue.
Prashant The representative of New Zealand said that in response to the statement of the
representative of Brazil, his delegation could not speak on every resolution that was
duplicated. His delegation’s approach was the same for resolutions that it voted for or
against. The intention was to draw to the Committee’s attention its agenda that was
continuously growing. His delegation would not question the importance of any resolution
or the prerogative of any delegation to introduce a resolution.

7.43
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

India:The right to self-determinations implied free elections, democracy, equality,
secularism and the rule of law, he said. The Pakistani people had been deprived of those
rights for most of their history. The Government of Pakistan must therefore ensure the right
to self-determination to its own people, before tabling resolutions on the universal right to
self-determination. The representative of India would therefore vote against the draft
resolution.

Same resolution was supported by India many times, but this time Pakis made a play by
making it look like resolution on Kashmir, which according to India is its own political
agenda.
Paki rep:India had joined the consensus on the text for several years in a row.

The representative of Benin, making a general statement, said that she had not expected
things to be so complicated. The concern of the draft was to support the general
decolonization process, not issues between India and Pakistan. She therefore withdrew
her co-sponsorship, since it seemed the draft was no longer about the universal right to
self-determination.
Continued 7/1/2005 12:35 PM
After Paki game: The representatives of Kenya and Botswana joined others and withdrew
their co-sponsorship.

A representative of Malaysia, a traditional co-sponsor of the draft resolution, said she
regretted the attempts to muddy the important issue of self-determination.

Opening the Committee’s afternoon meeting, the representative of St. Vincent and the
Grenadines said she would withdraw her co-sponsorship due to the alteration of the
context within which it would be approved.

Finally In a vote of 88 in favour and 64 abstentions, with 3 opposed (Bhutan, India,
Mauritius), the draft was approved

After the voting
A representative of Cyprus said he had abstained with great regret even though his
Prashant Government attached great importance to the principle of self-determination. However, the
context that prevailed was not appropriate, and had not allowed him to vote in favour of the
draft.
The representative of the United States explained why he had abstained. The United
States believed that the best solution would be a mutual resolution of issues between India
and Pakistan, taking into account the interests of all parties.

Pakistan:It was not Pakistan’s intention to introduce controversy or polemics with
India in the context of the resolution. Pakistan had introduced this resolution for
almost one dozen years. He said it was a matter of record that over the years,
Pakistan had mentioned Palestine, Namibia and also Kashmir in its statements
related to the resolution. What happened this year was that the context had been
changed, and polemics introduced by India.
7/4/2005 7:12 AM
You wrote: Can you give me latest UN resolution on Kashmir?

I gave you the whole lot of the resolutions and the appropriate links to those. I gave you the
dialogue of the Secretary General of the United Nations with the journalists in Pakistan and
India that the resolutions are not redundant. He explained that the Kashmir resolutions
don’t fall under the Chapter-VII while the resolutions pertaining to Iraq and East Timor fall
under the said chapter. He also explained that the Chapter-VII resolutions are self
implementing while the resolutions regarding Kashmir are to be resolved peacefully with
the consent of India and Pakistan. This is where we the Pakistani people and the people of
Kashmir think we have been tricked.
Syed
You wrote: Can you provide me one single line in any UN resolution which says "India's
occupation of Kashmir is illegal"

I tried to explain to you that question of legality will come when the dispute has been
resolved and the blame has been put on one of the parties. Mind you Kofi Annan terms the
problem between India and Pakistan as Kashmir Dispute.

7.44
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/4/2005 7:56 AM
You wrote: Can you quote me any UNSC (permanent mem) country's official website
telling India to hold plebiscite in Kashmir?
Can you quote similar websites of non-arabic countries?

I gave you the press release of the United Nations which gives you an account of the
session which was meant for resolving the people’s right of self determination and turned
into a Kashmir specific debate.

You write Finally In a vote of 88 in favour and 64 abstentions, with 3 opposed (Bhutan,
India, Mauritius), the draft was approved.

Irrespective of, if it was Pakistani game or not, the fact of the matter is that 88 countries are
Syed in favour and all are not Arabs. Further more there were around 35 absentees had they
voted the figure of 88 could have been more.

I think it is the loss of hope among the people who are facing the problem with out any
solution for more than half a century which has compelled them to turn to militancy. Better
the sanity prevails and the outstanding genuine problems solved sooner the better.

You cannot trick innocent and peace loving people of Kashmir indefinitely. Better people of
the world start differentiating between militancy terrorism and struggle for freedom and
right of self determination.
7/4/2005 1:29 PM
Mind you Kofi Annan terms the problem between India and Pakistan as Kashmir Dispute.
By dispute he means that he is acknowledging neither point of view. Its like taking neutral
stance.
Anyways I would have agreed if anywhere illegal occupation would have come into the
picture. But it didn't.
Or maybe I am unaware of Ghanaian vocabulary and I am unable to comprehend that by
dispute he may have meant 'illegal occupation by India'. Give me a break.

Regarding the UN resolutions, then I have been through them back and forth. The last UN
resolution on India Pakistan was
Resolution 303 December 06 71
before that it was in 65 and before that in 57.
So after that UN siezed to exist, Security council was dissolved or what.

Why there are no UN resolution lately, that was the point I was trying to make.

Resolution
38 January 17 48-Does not talks about Kashmir
39 January 20 48-Talks about situtation in Kashmir, which is well known fact of history.
Pakistani tribals attacked Kashmir.
47 April 21 48-Strongly supports restoration of peace in Kashmir, says the Question of
Prashant accession shall be decided by plebiscite in Kashmir.
It also says that Pakistani tribals and forces have to pull out.
When the pakis are out, Indian forces shall be reduced to minimum. Then plebiscite shall
take place. Since Pakistan never complied to it, so it never took place.

51 June 22 48
80 March 14 50
91 March 30 51
122 January 24 57
-Reaffirms the resolution 38/39/47

98 December 23 52-Says that demilitarization has not been achieved because India and
Pakitan have not agreed on whole of point 7 of the 12 point proposal(GOI shall establish
plebiscite administration to hold a pleb)

123 February 21 57-No reference to plebiscite
126 December 02 57-Asks both govs to refrain from making aggrevious statements.
209 September 04 65-Calls for ceasefire in Kashmir.

So I consider the latest UN resolution in 1957.(48 years ago)

7.45
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/4/2005 1:50 PM
You just answer these questions:
Do we take this resolution as the resolution on Kashmir?
Was it clear enough for the members that they are voting for the plebiscite in Kashmir?
turned into a Kashmir specific debate.
Its a weak argument, it wasn't a debate on Kashmir.

Major countries like France, Germany, UK, US, Russia abstain from it, because of cheap
tactics Pakistani representative resorted to.

Prashant Out of the major world players only China and Brazil were in favour of the resolution.

Most of the small countries supported the resolution because their own existance was
based on the right of self-determination, so whether its turned over some other issue of
not, they supported it(as Bangla rep said).
India supported it all over these years(w/o voting), but this year on Paki gameplay they
demanded for a voting.
Paki rep commented on that too.
7/4/2005 9:51 PM
"Most of the small countries supported the resolution because their own existance was
based on the right of self-determination, so whether its turned over some other issue of
not, they supported it"

OhReally Lol, spoken like a true aggressor!!!!!
7/5/2005 1:25 PM
Like India was not supporting this resolution all these years.

The only problem with that year's resolution was the confusion created by the Pakistani
representative.

Prashant And many countries like he representatives of Kenya and Botswana joined others and
withdrew their co-sponsorship.

Why would anyone do that?

7/6/2005 1:27 AM
Prashant Said:
Why there are no UN resolution lately, that was the point I was trying to make.

That was because Bhutto, the Pakistan Premier after the war of 71, made a deal with india
which stated that pakistan would not take the matter up to the united nations in exchange
Ahmad for Prisoners of war.

And thus Pakistan recieved its prisoners and stopped complaining to the United Nations
until recently.
7/6/2005 6:52 PM
@Prashant

No matter what argument and counter argument we put forward the fact remains that
Kashmir is a disputed territory. Isn’t it significant and against the Indian stance that there
were only 3 countries to oppose the resolution? Isn’t 88 an over whelming majority.
Abstention is the situation when you are undecided that is 50-50.

If Kashmir becomes independent it will be a neighboring country to India. Don’t you think
all these years while supporting the right of self determination of the people, India has been
denying the same to its neighbor? What would you call this if not hypocrisy? What have
Syed you gained by keeping the dirt under the carpet for more than half century?

Kashmiri leaders and some of them allegedly militants traveled to Pakistani held Kashmir
and later on to Pakistan also, they were without any passports, I heard. Which international
law is there to support this event? We talk of major countries they have exposed
themselves during the Iraq episode. They were at the height of hypocrisy while the masses
all over the world were protesting.

7.46
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/6/2005 7:05 PM
@Ahmed

Below is copy paste of the concluding paragraphs of the Shimla agreement. I take it as the
position of India and Pakistan vis-à-vis Kashmir is unaltered and that its final settlement is
outstanding.

In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the
Governments agree that:

1. Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border.
2. In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-fire of December 17,
1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of
either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective of mutual differences
and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to refrain from the threat or the use
of force in violation of this line.
3. The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this agreement and shall be
Syed completed within a period of thirty days thereof.

This agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries in accordance with their
respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from the date on
which the instruments of ratification are exchanged.

Both Governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually
convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two sides
will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the establishment of
durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions of repatriation of
prisoners of war and civilian internees, a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir and the
resumption of diplomatic relations.
7/6/2005 7:34 PM
Below is the copy of the title of the Simla agreement

Simla Agreement on Bilateral Relations between India and Pakistan signed by Prime
Minister of India, Mrs. Indira Gandhi, and President of Pakistan, Mr. Z. A. Bhutto, in
Simla on July 3, 1972.

http://www.indianembassy.org/policy/Kashmir/shimla.htm
Syed
For the pleasure of the parties taking part in the discussion the above link is form an Indian
source.
@Ahmed 7/7/2005 3:46 PM
I was about to say the same that in Shimla agreement there is no where written that
Pakistan will not bring Kashmir issue to UN.

@Syed
Isn’t 88 an over whelming majority.
Prashant You are skipping my question, let me ask it again, is this the number of countries who are
against the fact that Kashmir belongs to India.
Do you think if you bring Kashmir's issue to UN then 88 countries will support Pakistan on
Kashmir issue?
7/7/2005 8:07 PM
That would be hypothetical if I assume 88 countries will support. None of us could be a
judge may be more countries will support or it could be less. The best forum is the United
Nations to arrive at some decision no matter who wins. And that the will of the people of
Kashmir should be taken as supreme. I believe that militancy starts when the dialogue
ends and the aggrieved party feels deceived. Half a century is more than a limit to test the
patience of the nations whether it is Palestine or the Kashmiri people.
Syed
I am grieved and take this opportunity to condole the loss of innocent lives of civilians in
London.
7/8/2005 3:46 AM
I have asked this question to a lot of Pakistanis, but they don't seem to handle a lot of
details of this "right of self-determination thing".
Prashant Answer these questions:

7.47
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1)Do you want exactly the same plebiscite of UN resolution?
2)Do you think that demographies may have been altered(on either side)?
3)Do you think that either side will be able to alter the plebiscite outcome by altering
demographies?
4)In case of a 51%-49% outcome, what shall be done?
5)Simple majority or complete majority?
6)Areawise plebiscite or complete plebiscite?
7)What about after that?
8)According to ex-ISI chief Hamid Gul Free Kashmir will become a pawn in the hand of
imperial powers, and thus it will not be good for India, Pakistan and China, what about
this?
9)Do you know how much Indians regret of partition? Another partition would create so
much inner turmoil in India, that next party may come in power just by promising undoing of
the new partition(I don't think you will be able to realize the gravity of this point, but its 1
Billion people we are talking here).
7/11/2005 3:18 PM
Singh chacha
be calm!
this isnt Kashmir only over which India bullied pakistan. the instruments of succession
signed in the cases of Hyderabad, Mongrol, Manavadhar, Sardargarh, Junagadh etc. were
all farce and fraudulent.
the border disputes with China, Bangladesh, sri lanka etc. all provide ample evidence of
the bullying n coercing attitude of our big bro INDIA.
Asad
uncle Syed is wasting his time over u. :)
an Indian wud never give in, right?
7/11/2005 3:20 PM
shall we start a debate on kashmir from some other angle?
like from the angle of the states i just mentioned?

Asad
7/11/2005 4:22 PM
now u wud say that u dont know abt these states or watever India did was justified. right?
no doubt u wud. no body likes to hear against his country? neither wud i nor wud u.

Asad

7/11/2005 4:33 PM
this isnt Kashmir only over which India bullied pakistan. the instruments of succession
signed in the cases of Hyderabad, Mongrol, Manavadhar, Sardargarh, Junagadh etc. were
all farce and fraudulent.
exactly like you people did the forceful accession of Baluchistan(42% of Pakistan is
forcefully annexed, great, you can find Bauchi people all over the net, and I have seen
pakis simply abusing them).

an Indian wud never give in, right?
Now we actually come to the main point, nothing would be done to Kashmir unless Indian
people agreed to do so. In fact if you are making even a single Indian agree on Kashmir,
you would be doing more work than musharraf.
Prashant Indian POV
In simple words, doing plebiscite in Kashmir would be taking a risk of another partition.
Plebiscite is not suitable in today's perspective.
Second thing, successful completion of elections in Kashmir shows that most of the people
want to take part in democracy, so Pakistan's claim that Kashmiri Youth is taking up arms
is false. So called Kashmiri freedom fighting movement is fake.
We don't hear any Kashmiri(non-politico) voices to free Kashmir.
We hear Manipuris shouting against Indian rule, ULFA being able to lure many young
people to join them.

7.48
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

But Kashmir is all different. We hear news of Pakistani weaponary, Pakistani nationality,
and Pakistani ideology being dominent in Kashmir.
Second thing, if Kashmir wants to be free, then why do only muslims have this demand.
There are 12-13 crores of muslims in India, they don't raise this demand, only Kashmiri
muslims have this demand(for the record if this movement had been involved with all sects
or even with buddhists then the demand would have been much stronger).
7/11/2005 5:48 PM
Final and last thing, India cannot afford the risk of another partition.
I am simply telling you a fact,
* UN cannot force India to go for a plebiscite or to do anything about Kashmir, nor do they
are doing anything.
* Pakistan can forget to take Kashmir militarily.
* Indian people do not agree for another partition or even taking the risk of another
partition.

Now as you can see, only Indian people(Kashmiri muslims alone cannot do anything(I
mean changing Indian opinion), take it as a fact) can do something about it.

Now why nothing is ever going to happen from Indian side.
Because lets assume today some Indian government, opts for plebiscite in Kashmir.
Next day, opposition will be either able to break away 90% of the MPs of the current
government,
or/and
major nationwide protests are going to go on all over India(when chittisingpura massacare
Prashant took place, whole nation faced a Bandh, you would have been surprised to see how
crippled a 1 Billion strong nation became).
This may or may not soon turn into violent protests, the PM(who took this decision) would
be called traitor, will have his political career dead(if there was one godse who killed
Gandhi because he took him responsible for partition then today there will be millions of
them, for in simple words want to kill the PM who did this traitorship).

Assume this thing to be done very quickly, then the next government can simply gain full
majority just by promising a military strike to take back the areas(or if its BJP then Akhand
Bharat).

Concluding what all I have said, that Kashmir problem's solution lies not in Kashmir but in
people of Pakistan and India.
If they are at peace there won't be any Kashmir problem, but if they are not then there is
going to be Kashmir, Baluchistan and what not.
@prashant 7/11/2005 6:34 PM
Who told you pakistan annexed Baluchistan?

I will tell you once and for all that the 'jirga'(Tribal assembly) of Baluchistan and NWFP
decided in favour of Pakistan.. you can believe watever you want now and nobody's gonna
Sabih
argue with you..
7/11/2005 7:48 PM
Who told you pakistan annexed Baluchistan?
Wikipedia

Read the whole article dude.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baluchistan
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baluchistan#Accession_Problem_1948

Pakistan's record of accession is not clean with Baluchistan. There were three revolts 1948
just after the Baluchistan was acceeded to Pakistan, 1968, and then in 1970s when
Pakistan was divided.
Finally the worst part of baluchi history is in the reigm of Musharraf.
Prashant
Pak army is using all its latest machinery to curb the resistance of Baluchi leaders.

Nawab Bugti Khan who was once elected CM of Baluchistan holds no voice in front of
Pakistan, and Pakistan thinks that making a port of Gawadar will help them a lot, when
already whole of the Gawadar land is grabbed by the land mafia of Punjab.

I have seen so many Baluchis saying Baluchistan is for Baluchis, and Pakistan was always
for Punjabis it was never for Baluchis.

7.49
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/11/2005 11:30 PM
Baluchistan is ruled by tons of tribal warlords who dunt give a damn about their population
and their welfare.
They believe that with the construction of gawadar, the area and more part of baluchistans
tribe will gain education. Ones that will happen the population will ask for civil and
Ahmad humanitarian rights from their tribal leaders. Thus they dunt want developement.
7/12/2005 1:09 AM
Dude you people never listen to the argument offered by us for Kashmir and now you want
us to listen to yours.

Do you know how much money do we pour into Kashmir?
Your punjab will become another Baluchistan if you poured same amount in Kashmir.

Second thing is that, in 50 years they have rose 3 times, that too without any foreign
intervention(accusation on India is only on the 4th time).
And all you people have to say is, once gwadar port will be done, or once they will remove
their tribal lords everything will be fine.
Prashant There was a full fledged thread on Pakistan community, where some Baluchis were
arguing with pakis, and most of the Pakis were asking them to get out of the country.

What I want to say is that Pakistan is not a perfect country in this matter either?

If you remove the Pakistan factor from Kashmir issue then actually there is no issue.
Kashmir was a perfect state before Pakistan started sponsering terrorism/FF movement
there.
Parshant 7/12/2005 1:51 AM
would ya kindly let me know which pakistani community you are talking about where
balouchis are disscusing things about this.

Akber
@Akber 7/12/2005 9:48 AM
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=1780853&tid=10815615&pno=4

And this was the thread I was talking about(had to search a lot):
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=5167&tid=11177183
Check this too from the same community:
Prashant http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=5167&tid=11883768

And guys please trust me for what I say(at least on non-trivial matters like this).
7/12/2005 10:09 AM
There is no analogy between the number of problems being discussed here and the
Kashmir. There are resolutions of the United Nations on Kashmir and the problem is
universally taken as a dispute between India and Pakistan.

There is difference between an election and a plebiscite. If you talk about elections in
Kashmir, we have several such elections in our country conducted by successive generals.
No general ever got less than 60 percent vote. Elections in Kashmir are always sham and
not even near to what a usurper general in any country would conduct.

Akhand bharat is a dream which will never come true. India is a huge country with diverse
and unfriendly cultures hence more prone to fall apart if the rights of the people are not
Syed given.

Wikipedia is not an authentic source it is open to all for editing. I have traveled extensively
in Baluchistan during 70s. People there are struggling for there rights, but there has never
been any struggle for freedom. These problems can be there in the most advanced of
nations like Ireland Quebec etc.
7/12/2005 10:18 AM
yeah that s a bogus site...

Sabih

7.50
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/12/2005 10:21 AM
and abt the community you gave.. there is only one person who is "posing as a Baluchi"...

Sabih
7/12/2005 10:22 AM
and abt the community you gave.. there is only one person who is "posing as a Baluchi"...

Sabih
7/12/2005 10:22 AM
and abt the community you gave.. there is only one person who is "posing as a Baluchi"...

Sabih
7/12/2005 12:30 PM
Yeah I agree that this site is open for editing and probably this article is written by some
RAW agent in Pakistan.

But I think you fail to understand that when an ostrich buries his head in sand to hide his
face...his arse is still wide open in front of the world.

@Sabih
Prashant Check out the Baluchistan community
http://www.orkut.com/Community.aspx?cmm=1026989

And you didn't read the whole thread, there are many baluchis on the same thread(at least
4 of them are there, including a woman)
-->PRASHANT, answers to ur questions 7/12/2005 2:39 PM
1- Talking of the regret of Partition. That’s ur problem my dear. If India is really justified in
ruling various nationalities under the banner of secularism n if they r really happy under the
Indian govt, then there is no point of a turmoil by giving the due right of self-determination
to a single state n its people, who r not happy with the govt n who hav been fighting for this
right for such a long time. Those who think they r happy will continue to remain so whether
Kashmir is a part of India or not. But since the govt is guilty of misrule, n misgivings n
feeling of injustice r there among the people in India so it really becomes a headache for
the govt when it even contemplates giving Kashmiris their due right becoz they know that
other states wud demand the same. And as far as I know, there r abt 8 to 10 freedom
movements going on in India n its not only Kashmir. How do u explain this Singh bhai? U
must b seeing any ISI or a MAGIC hand involved in it.

No sane Pakistani regrets the partition. It was based on a justified 2-nation theory which is
fully valid to the day n will remain so as long as Pakistan exists. If the Indians do regret it
then it’s their fault that they r still hung up on the idea of a united India.
Asad 2- abt the ex-ISI Chief… well… who said he was an authority on the issue? n moreover his
statement is an opinion n not the final word. Besides, becoming a pawn or anything is a
separate debatable issue. How do u see the Indo-USA “strategic relationship” ? Isn’t India
becoming a pawn of the USA in Asia to mainly counter China n other rising powers in the
region?

3- This is to quote u, “Do ‘you’ want exactly the same plebiscite of UN resolution?” plz
include the Kashmiri Muslims in this “you” too. YES, we want the same plebiscite as
envisaged in the UN resolution of 1948. Indian was the one who denied that resolution,
Pakistan did not.
-->PRASHANT, answers to ur questions (II) 7/12/2005 2:37 PM
4- On both sides the demography must hav changed. The difference is that on ur side it
has been changed by way of force in the form of killing of around 1 lac people (but in vain)
n pouring in Hindus from outside Kashmir, while on ur side the change has followed a
natural course n population still comprises the natives(as domicile rules for people who r
not natives of Azad Kashmir r very strict). But the place(the whole of Kashmir state, both
parts combined) still remains to be largely inhabited by the Muslims who r not less than 70-
80% of the total population of the whole state.
Asad
5- Whenever there will b a plebiscite, it will include “Jammu n Kashmir” n “Azad Kashmir”

7.51
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

only n not whole of India n Pakistan so there is no point in alteration of demography by any
country, unless India starts pouring in more Hindus or army in the state, n filling the
emptied trucks of the Indian army with the Kashmiri Muslims n kicking them out of the
state. There is a definite record of the population statistics in the form of a census,
electoral rolls etc. (atleast that is maintained in Azad Kashmir) and even if that is feared to
be altered by the “wary” indians then it cud be prevented by appointing neutral UN officials
for a considerable period of time b4 the plebiscite who wud see to it that no such alteration
is ventured by any of the 2 countries.

6- Outcome is definitely going to be 70%(Muslims)-30%(others) or 80-20, don’t worry.
Kashmiri Muslims wud stand united, I m sure of that. They didn’t fight for half a century to
give a 51-49 outcome.
-->PRASHANT, answers to ur questions(III) 7/12/2005 2:43 PM
7- There shud be a complete plebiscite. There is no question of an area-wise plebiscite n
besides it doesn’t make sense. Kashmir shud meet the same fate as the other states of the
united India had met on the eve of independence. The underlying principle of partition was
“Muslim majority provinces/states wud go to Pakistan while Hindu majority
provinces/states wud go to India.” No point in making Kashmir an exception to this
principle as had been done in some of the Muslim majority areas like Gurdaspur,
Ferozepur, Nadia districts etc. n some princely sates too.

8- After that…well…as uncle Syed pointed out it must be the will of kashmiris that must b
taken as supreme n of nobody else, so it wud be their will for all of us to see.

But Prashant bhai, pareshaan nahin hona. Coz this is never gonna happen dear. To speak
of a plebiscite is just to speak of an ideal situation. Whatever may happen, let us just pray
Asad that it brings peace n stability to the region n India starts playing its part as the big-brother
n not as a step-brother.

Conclusion: the indian policy on Kashmir is caught on the horns of a dilemma and that is
that if it accepts the verdict of the people, it has to vacate the territory of state of Jammu n
Kashmir n if it was suppose to accept the decisions of the rulers, it has to vacate the
territory of Junagadh, Manavadhar, Mangrol, Hyderabad etc...
-->Prashant, about Balouchistan 7/12/2005 3:10 PM
u dont even know shit abt balouchistan man.
I m myself a BALOUCH for ur kind info.

wat u know abt Akbar bugti haan? tell me?
wat u know abt the sardari system, tribal system? u dont even know shit.
Akbar bugti for ur info. is the biggest blackmailer of all sardars who gets more than his due
share for the gas royalty, n whenever he feels that he wants more, he starts talking of
blaouch rights. have u ever been to Dera Bugti n seen the condition of the ppl there? u
wudnt have even heard of the place.

the problem in Balouchistan is that of underdevelopment n provincial autonomy, not of any
accession grievance, idiot.
Asad Y is india so much crying abt Gawadar port?
bcoz it has a potential to choke india's oil supply from the Strait of Hormuz in case of any
war with pak.
n most of ppl including balocuhs r of the belief that the sardars r speaking India's language
these days.

so when u dont know shit abt something, dont just pretend to be an authority on it.
-->Prashant 7/12/2005 4:19 PM
Prashant says,"Pakistan's record of accession is not clean with Baluchistan. "

Look who's talking... an indian, when india itself annexed fraudulenty more than abt a
dozen states.
wah ji wah.

this is none of any indian's damn business to talk abt balouchistan or anyother place here.
we r here to discuss kashmir dispute , which is indeed a dispute for the past half century or
Asad so. we hav fought 3 full scale wars over it. n one wud hav to be blind not to see it as a
dispute but a problem created by pakis only.

7.52
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

-->Prashant 7/12/2005 3:38 PM
how many Balouchistan resolutions have u seen being passed at the UN?
which of the Simla n Tashkant agreement contain a mention of Balochistan issue?

dont draw stupid n out of place analogies.

never mind,its an old indian habit that when indians dont find any solid argument, they just
start crying n giving fu..ed up analogies.
Asad
the way i see it u r running out of arguments over kashmir, Mr. Prashant singh.

@Asad I 7/13/2005 6:08 AM
1)<your point no 1>
In the words of Nobel laurete V S Naipaul India is having 1 million mutinies going on, if that
makes you happy then fine, but this doesn't helps in Kashmir situation at all. You are
simply forgetting the fact I tried to put, India is not ruled by politicians or army, its rule by its
people itself. And in an issue like Kashmir, you cannot expect people to let these simple
decisions to be taken so easily.
The point I just made here was, that the key to solution of Kashmir does not lies in
Kashmir, but in people of India and Pakistan, if Pakistani people leaves the support
of Kashmiri people problem will be solved, if India leaves Kashmir then also
problem will be solved

2)<your point no 2>
I never said ISI chief's word is the final word, he gave his opinion which matters a little
more than your endless whining. He was supporting the freedom struggle of Kashmiri
people, but he doesn't wants Kashmir to be an independent nation.
Prashant 3)<your 3rd point>
I don't think you understood my question, it wasn't a question asked from specifically from
Pakis, it was a question for the people in front me asking for plebiscite that whether they
want the EXACTLY the same plebiscite as said by UN resolution. And as long as you don't
clear this fact up, I am not doing any more discussion with you on Kashmir.

4)<your 4th point>
Either you have no idea of J&K's demography, or maybe BBC is banned where you live.
Do you know that I can't buy property in Kashmir just because I am not Kashmiri, even if I
marry a kashmiri girl even then I can't buy land, she will also lose land buying rights.
Otherwise you are simply making accusations, where I raised a possibility.

5)<yout 5th point>
So you believe that there can't be a possibility of demographic alteration.
@Asad II 7/13/2005 6:10 AM
6)<your 6th point>
First of all you have made many fallacious assumptions to continue talks, if you want me to
take your stupid arguments(I know 70% Kashmiri muslims will opt for pakistan) then
please don't be here on orkut arguing Indians, and burst some crackers smoke some
weed and enjoy that Kashmir banega Pakistan(I know you people like to chant that a lot).
Now still assuming your assumptions,
there are 64% Kashmiri Muslims who will opt for Pakistan and 36% remaining ones who
have shown no interest to join Pakistan or for free Kashmir.
So tell me one thing, what will happen if 64-36 result goes on. Pakistan is not a secular
country(don't give me Islamic-right-of-minorities bs) fact is that Pakistan is Islamic
Republic of Pakistan, and Indian policy is of secularism(again don't give me Gujarat BS).
Still, do you think Kashmir should be given to Pakistan, or rather the question should be
Prashant the fate of so many hindus and buddhists should be given in the hands of Pakistan?

7)<your 7th point>
So area wise plebiscite doesn't makes sense. I know the reason, because then what you
are going to get is smaller-than-goa area to Pakistan.

8)<your 8th point>
Who are Kashmiris? I live in Bhopal, and Bhopal's nawab never wanted to join India. So if
tommorrow I start raising the demand that Bhopal is of Bhopalis and supreme wish of
Bhopalis should be taken in, will you support me? Except for some morons supported by
Pakistan, everyone in Kashmir calls themselves as Indian.

7.53
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Do you think when a soldier dies fighting or rather tripping a bomb laid by terrorist in
Kashmir, he thinks that he is keeping hold on foreign land for his country? Well no, they all
die for their motherland, which as sacred as in Kashmir as in Rajasthan or in Manipur.
@Asad III 7/13/2005 5:12 AM
But Prashant bhai, pareshaan nahin hona. Coz this is never gonna happen dear. To speak
of a plebiscite is just to speak of an ideal situation. Whatever may happen, let us just pray
that it brings peace n stability to the region n India starts playing its part as the big-brother
n not as a step-brother.
The only part in the whole 6 segment post worth keeping is this. I agree with it, but add
one more thing to it, as long as the solution doesn't threatens the welfare of the people of
India or Pakistan, no solution would be acceptable.
(for instance if the liberated Kashmir becomes standpoint of next Jihadi terrorism all over
the world, with new Kashmiri leaders claiming to understand the cause of Al Queda type of
people, and letting their land for such activities
OR
for instance if the new Kashmir opts out for stopping any water to Pakistan, will any Paki
commander going to give rheotorics that there is going to be a war for water with Kashmir)

And please just do me a favour, kindly tell me the physical location of Junagarh,
Prashant Manavadhar, Mangrol, Hyderabad etc...

wat u know abt Akbar bugti haan? tell me?
wat u know abt the sardari system, tribal system? u dont even know shit.
How can be you so sure that I don't know a shit about these things, moreover what do
YOU know about Kashmir, have you ever been to J&K?

have u ever been to Dera Bugti n seen the condition of the ppl there? u wudnt have even
heard of the place.
I can say the same that you haven't been to Kashmir. But still for your satisfaction I have
heard of Dera Bugti Khan, and I have heard about the condition of that place, Nawab Bugti
Khan lives in the center of this place, its not having a single proper school, and it comes
under one of the most undeveloped area of Pakistan.
@Asad IV 7/13/2005 5:11 AM
the problem in Balouchistan is that of underdevelopment n provincial autonomy, not of any
accession grievance, idiot.
So let me ask you a very simple question,
WHAT IS THE PROBLEM OF KASHMIRI PEOPLE?
Accession grievance???
Do you know how much money does Indian government pours in Kashmir, do you know
the money allocated for Kashmir in last Budget? Do you know how damn rich these Indian
Kashmiris are?

so when u dont know shit abt something, dont just pretend to be an authority on it.
Exactly that's my point.
Let me requote you:
Outcome is definitely going to be 70%(Muslims)-30%(others) or 80-20, don’t worry.
Kashmiri Muslims wud stand united, I m sure of that. They didn’t fight for half a century to
Prashant give a 51-49 outcome.

how many Balouchistan resolutions have u seen being passed at the UN?
NONE, because India doesn't bothers itself with other people's internal matters, and
Baluchis themselves cannot take it to UN, its not possible legally.

which of the Simla n Tashkant agreement contain a mention of Balochistan issue?
Simla and Tashkant agreement were on the Indo-Pak war of 71, if the fight would have
been going on in Baluchistan then definitly it would be having a mention of it.

Prashant says,"Pakistan's record of accession is not clean with Baluchistan. "
Prashant meant When Pakistan's its own record of accession not clean with its 42% of
land then why the hell is she crying about India's accession over Kashmir.
solution to the dispute 7/27/2005 6:39 PM
Wel..wat u ppl think ..wat is the fair solution of this dispute..

₣ỪŘфẴП
solution to the dispute 7/27/2005 11:42 AM

7.54
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

₣ỪŘфẴП Wel..wat u ppl think ..wat is the fair solution of this dispute..
7/28/2005 10:54 AM
Their is only one solution which is acceptable to India and Indian people i.e. to accept LoC
as International Border, and stop any kind of infilteration or arms support to the terrorists in
Prashant J&K.
7/28/2005 6:00 PM
There is only one solution which is acceptable to India and Indian people i.e. to accept
LoC as International Border, and stop any kind of infilteration or arms support to the
Prashant terrorists in J&K.
INDIAN MASS SCALE TERRORISM A SLAP TO WAR ON TERRO 7/28/2005 6:26 PM
INDIAN MASS SCALE TERRORISM A SLAP TO WAR ON TERROR----- AND A SLAP
TO COALATION ARMY BY INDIA ON KILLING MORE THAN 5,000 REGISTERED
DEATH RATES --- MORE THAN 80,000 KILLINGS--- WHERE AS INDIAN ARMY
ACCEPTED TO KILL 50,000---- KASHMIR IS MOR IMPORTANT THAN PALESTINES---
BOZ WAKE UP
Zulqernain
7/28/2005 6:28 PM
Their is only one solution which is acceptable to India and Indian people i.e. to accept LoC
as International Border

That is not true. That is definitely not India's position . Even the Prime Minister of India
does not have the powers of signing of on such a deal, which requires an Act of
Bhaskar Parliament.

India's unwavering official position, all these years has always been, that ALL of Kashmir
belongs to India and that includes the Pakistani and Chinese occupied portions too!

7/28/2005 11:36 PM
ALL of Kashmir belongs to India and that includes the Pakistani and Chinese occupied
portions too!

Its very easy to say by you but hard to understand for us & rest of world. It is easy to kill
civilians in Kashmir but hard to get over the entire area, because Pakistan & China both
have army, navy & air-force.
You're running on the same track where your stupid hindu elders ran. This is 2005, not
1947. World is trying to get control on poverty, illness etc and you Indians are still weaping
for Kashmir. Get life dudes & try to see mirror from front side.

Kashif Dont get bother with China, that is India's father in every aspect. You poor Indian can't
construct a building in 2005, like Chinese constructed in 1960s. And talk about War with
China. Get life! China is next to super power of world, try to build good relations with
Chinese. Israel & USA is far away from you, China & Pakistan are your neighbours, first try
to make good relations with us before getting involved in international politics/disputes.

First make your country SECULAR & give basic necessities to your poor minorities like
Muslims, Sikhs & Christians before thinking about Kashmiri muslims.
Another confusion! 7/29/2005 1:45 AM
These countries (China, Pakistan and India) have got.... the Atomic Bomb!!
So.... Could we change the conversation?!! hihihih

Túlio
7/29/2005 5:23 AM
"It is God's responsibility to forgive the terrorist organizations such as Jaish, Lashkar etc.
who justify killing of innocent civilians in Kashmir and other parts of India.

It is our responsibility to arrange the meeting between them and god."

Praveen Indian Armed Forces
7/29/2005 5:27 AM
The day Pakistan stops equating terrorism aimed at India and at the rest of the world as
different, there is going to be progress. The ball is in your court.

Deliver the promises in January 2004 joint statement on cracking down on terrorist groups
operating from Pakistani soil. Don't give me that nonsense about none being present

7.55
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Praveen there. Your own news agencies say there are lots.

BTW, the more you live in denial, it hurts Pakistan more than India. The international
community is coming around. They today see what is happening in Kashmir,7/7 and 9/11
as the same. Killing of innocent civilians is Terrorism. The only reason USA is soft on
Pakistan now is because they want your co-operation in Afghanistan. It is not as if they
don't know about it.

About human rights violations in Kashmir, we Indians have never denied it. It happens and
is unfortunate. But, that doesn't justify the huge noise created by human rights activists in
India and abroad or state-sponsored terrorism of Pakistan and your absurd claims that we
are promoting ethnic cleansing.

The real ethnic cleansing of Muslims is happening in Xinjiang province in China, your close
ally. Has your feeling for your Muslim brothers and sisters melted away just because they
supplied you nukes? That's another bit of double standards like the one on terrorism.

About Kashmiri independence, it is a non-starter. Let us be realistic. They don't have the
financial resources to do it and besides, even if they are made independent, they will still
be subject to interference vis-a-vis strategic interests of India, Pakistan and China.

The solution is... it may be sad for some, but it is reality. India will have to give up its claims
on Pakistani administered Kashmir. Pakistan will have to give up its claims on Indian
administered Kashmir. China unfortunately will have Aksai Chin, the other part of J&K.

The day this happens and LoC becomes an international border, will India get its forces
out of the valley.
7/29/2005 12:17 AM
Thats quite a load of crap!

Please define terrorism! The UN doesnt do it! One nation's terrorists are another's freedom
fighters. So keep the propaganda to yourself. And if you think that killing innocent civilians
is terrorism, then the Indian Army is a terrorist organisation! Just take a quick peek at
reports from Amnesti International, or any other international organization! Hell, you dont
even deny it..."we Indians have never denied it"...which is also incoorect, you do deny it.
Ask your government.

"Deliver the promises in January 2004", who the hell do you think you are? Pakistan
doesnt answer to you! And before talking about promises, what about Nehru's promise to
the People of Kashmir and to the UN and world community? So go clean your house up
before pointing fingers at others!

Oh I almost forgot you are also an expert on the International Community! "They today see
what is happening in Kashmir,7/7 and 9/11 as the same." Wow. You must be one hell of a
Aun charachter pal! The only reason the internation community(if there is no such thing, its
basically the US/western europe) seems to be coming aound is that they are scared of
China who will be challenging their global dominance. The only reason India is being woed
is that India seems to be a good counterweight, at least on the face of it! But then comes
along Pakistan and scews up their equation!

"The solution is... it may be sad for some, but it is reality. India will have to give up its
claims on Pakistani administered Kashmir"????? What are you, and Indian negotiator?
Are you the Prime Minister, or some other senior figure in the goverment to be making
such a solution avalible? But then again, Does it matter? Nehru is a case in point!

The question for you is, are you content to be a nation that lives on the crumbs of the us
and the west? Looking at your movies it surely looks like it....take a few english movies,
mix em and translate, add a few songs and show. And if thats too hard, just translate and
add a few songs and show.
7/29/2005 7:25 AM
Sure, we have our part of crap. But hey it is nothing compared to Gujrat, the population
explosion india is facing, the Aid problem in India, the environmental degradation there,
Poverty and unequal distribution of wealth, Kashmir, problems in Assam and the list goes
on. So my friend, keep your balls where they belong instead of throwing them our way.
Aun Cos we ll fry em and eat em!
PS: Oh and I almost totally forgot.....your illegal dams, well they are illegal, fait accompli or

7.56
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

not!
7/29/2005 2:09 AM
Please define terrorism!

Here's another moron from a tribe that doesn't understand what the rest of the world
Bhaskar understand. Monkey in a suit.
7/29/2005 2:12 AM
Dont get bother with China, that is India's father in every aspect.

Here's another specimen from Pakistan. Wonder who let these morons out.
Bhaskar
7/29/2005 9:15 AM
Another Pakistani chap who uses orkut communities for bashing India and to give vent to
his frustration rather than for debating!

Praveen
7/29/2005 2:37 AM
I may not be the PM... but, I have my basics of current affairs right and don't let emotions
get the better of me while debating issues unlike some of you.

One more thing... do you know the more you all talk like this, the more it hurts you and
your nation and it also portrays your inferiority complex!
Praveen

7/29/2005 5:27 AM
The day Pakistan stops equating terrorism aimed at India and at the rest of the world as
different, there is going to be progress. The ball is in your court.

Deliver the promises in January 2004 joint statement on cracking down on terrorist groups
operating from Pakistani soil. Don't give me that nonsense about none being present
there. Your own news agencies say there are lots.

BTW, the more you live in denial, it hurts Pakistan more than India. The international
community is coming around. They today see what is happening in Kashmir,7/7 and 9/11
as the same. Killing of innocent civilians is Terrorism. The only reason USA is soft on
Pakistan now is because they want your co-operation in Afghanistan. It is not as if they
don't know about it.

About human rights violations in Kashmir, we Indians have never denied it. It happens and
is unfortunate. But, that doesn't justify the huge noise created by human rights activists in
India and abroad or state-sponsored terrorism of Pakistan and your absurd claims that we
are promoting ethnic cleansing.

Praveen The real ethnic cleansing of Muslims is happening in Xinjiang province in China, your close
ally. Has your feeling for your Muslim brothers and sisters melted away just because they
supplied you nukes? That's another bit of double standards like the one on terrorism.

About Kashmiri independence, it is a non-starter. Let us be realistic. They don't have the
financial resources to do it and besides, even if they are made independent, they will still
be subject to interference vis-a-vis strategic interests of India, Pakistan and China.

The solution is... it may be sad for some, but it is reality. India will have to give up its claims
on Pakistani administered Kashmir. Pakistan will have to give up its claims on Indian
administered Kashmir. China unfortunately will have Aksai Chin, the other part of J&K.

The day this happens and LoC becomes an international border, will India get its forces
out of the valley.
7/29/2005 12:17 AM
Thats quite a load of crap!

Please define terrorism! The UN doesnt do it! One nation's terrorists are another's freedom
fighters. So keep the propaganda to yourself. And if you think that killing innocent civilians
Aun is terrorism, then the Indian Army is a terrorist organisation! Just take a quick peek at
reports from Amnesti International, or any other international organization! Hell, you dont

7.57
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

even deny it..."we Indians have never denied it"...which is also incoorect, you do deny it.
Ask your government.

"Deliver the promises in January 2004", who the hell do you think you are? Pakistan
doesnt answer to you! And before talking about promises, what about Nehru's promise to
the People of Kashmir and to the UN and world community? So go clean your house up
before pointing fingers at others!

Oh I almost forgot you are also an expert on the International Community! "They today see
what is happening in Kashmir,7/7 and 9/11 as the same." Wow. You must be one hell of a
charachter pal! The only reason the internation community(if there is no such thing, its
basically the US/western europe) seems to be coming aound is that they are scared of
China who will be challenging their global dominance. The only reason India is being woed
is that India seems to be a good counterweight, at least on the face of it! But then comes
along Pakistan and scews up their equation!

"The solution is... it may be sad for some, but it is reality. India will have to give up its
claims on Pakistani administered Kashmir"????? What are you, and Indian negotiator?
Are you the Prime Minister, or some other senior figure in the goverment to be making
such a solution avalible? But then again, Does it matter? Nehru is a case in point!

The question for you is, are you content to be a nation that lives on the crumbs of the us
and the west? Looking at your movies it surely looks like it....take a few english movies,
mix em and translate, add a few songs and show. And if thats too hard, just translate and
add a few songs and show.
7/29/2005 7:25 AM
Sure, we have our part of crap. But hey it is nothing compared to Gujrat, the population
explosion india is facing, the Aid problem in India, the environmental degradation there,
Poverty and unequal distribution of wealth, Kashmir, problems in Assam and the list goes
on. So my friend, keep your balls where they belong instead of throwing them our way.
Aun Cos we ll fry em and eat em!
PS: Oh and I almost totally forgot.....your illegal dams, well they are illegal, fait accompli or
not!
7/29/2005 2:09 AM
Please define terrorism!

Here's another moron from a tribe that doesn't understand what the rest of the world
Bhaskar understand. Monkey in a suit.
7/29/2005 2:12 AM
Dont get bother with China, that is India's father in every aspect.

Here's another specimen from Pakistan. Wonder who let these morons out.
Bhaskar
7/29/2005 9:15 AM
Another Pakistani chap who uses orkut communities for bashing India and to give vent to
his frustration rather than for debating!

Praveen
7/29/2005 2:37 AM
I may not be the PM... but, I have my basics of current affairs right and don't let emotions
get the better of me while debating issues unlike some of you.

One more thing... do you know the more you all talk like this, the more it hurts you and
your nation and it also portrays your inferiority complex!
Praveen
7/29/2005 10:30 AM
And you are the spokesperson for the rest of the world? HAHHAHA. By the way, please
dont call me monkey in a suit bcos some people in India might find that offensive. After all
he is one of the Gods.....Hanuman, I think. So at least be respectful to your own
Aun compatriot's God.
7/29/2005 3:45 AM
You are DAMN right you are not the PM. But you are wrong on all other counts. And you
got your current affairs right? Read what I wrote earlier more carefully. The only reason

7.58
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Aun you are trying to use ridicule is that you have nothing concrete to say. It is you who is
letting your emotions lose.

And the "One more thing... ", thanks but no thanks, nobody here needs your advice pal.

As far as the inferiority complex goes, well lets look at the stats: India is four or five times
larger than pakistan but you people are fixated on us.... I rest my case.

Plus I dont see any point in debating with you, bcos 1- you aint the PM, although as
pointed out earlier, we cant trust your PM either (Nehru's case in point) 2- there is no point
in debating with people who thnik they have it all figured out. You dont want to debate, you
just want us to agree to what you want. And that my friend aint gonna happen!
7/29/2005 10:50 AM
Oh and by the way, since you know the definition of terrorism, please enlighten the world!
We are listning!
Aun

7/29/2005 11:04 AM
So keep the propaganda to yourself. And if you think that killing innocent civilians is
terrorism....

For the Paki monkey in the suit who can't understand the meaning of terrorism....

Read this to give nourishment to your brain...from TODAY's news.
Bhaskar
Militants 'slit Hindus' throats'

"Killings such as these, by slitting throats, have increased for two reasons - they want to
create terror and their supply lines of guns from across the border are coming under
pressure from us."
7/29/2005 4:17 AM
Speaking of Pakistan, the monkeys can barely keep up their pants without raping people.
They did that extensively in Bangladesh and now they do it in that part of Kashmir
occupied by Pakistan.

Bhaskar Read this from TODAY's news!

3 Pakistan soldiers accused accused of rape in Kashmir!
Wildly old bhaskar 7/29/2005 5:41 AM
are you in capable of posting a single message here without insulting anyone?

and am just curious? dont you have anything productive to do .. that you spent most of
Akber your awaken time posting insulting messages on orkut?
Akber 7/29/2005 11:54 AM
Aren't you ashamed of what your country and your brethren are doing in Kashmir?

Is this your pathetic attempt at dodging the criminal actions of your country and live in
denial?

Bhaskar Do you think with these sort of actions, your country is going to get a clean image?

Read the links on the first post here to read about Pakistani terrorism in Kashmir in July
2005 alone!
7/29/2005 5:06 AM
In an incident on 22 April, several armed forces personnel forcibly entered the house of a
32-year-old woman in the village of Wawoosa in the Rangreth district of Jammu and
Kashmir. They reportedly molested her 12-year-old daughter and raped her other three
daughters, aged 14, 16 and 18. When another woman attempted to prevent soldiers from
attacking her two daughters, she was beaten. Soldiers reportedly told her 17-year-old
Aun daughter to remove her clothes so that they could check whether she was hiding a gun.
They molested her before leaving the house.

A 29-year-old woman was also reportedly raped in her home in the same village. No action

7.59
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

is known to have been taken against the alleged perpetrators, but according to information
received by Amnesty International, the women were reluctant to file a complaint for fear of
reprisal and being stigmatised in their community.

Amnesty International has documented violations in Jammu and Kashmir including torture,
rape, deaths in custody, extrajudicial executions and "disappearances" over a number of
years. Investigation and prosecution in cases of human rights violations are rare, and
armed forces have been given a free reign in the region with little civilian control over their
operations.

.... http://web.amnesty.org/library/index/ENGASA200241997
7/29/2005 5:09 AM
The monkey in the suit is proving his pedigree. He's posted a May 1997 article, whilst we
are discussing what happened in July 2005! Moron!
Bhaskar
7/29/2005 5:20 AM
Sixteen Years of Atrocities
From January 1989 to April 30, 2005

Total Killings * 89,742
Custodial Killings 6,771
Civilians Arrested 110,100
Structures Arsoned / Destroyed 104,866
Aun Women Widowed 22,240
Children Orphaned 106,353
Women gang-raped / Molested 9,579

And these are just the statistics!
7/29/2005 5:25 AM
The monkey in suit says F-ck you! It doesnt matter duffer, 97, 98, 99, ...05. Indians are the
same! In fact 32 women get raped in India, DAILY!! And thats not counting Kashmir. You
better brush up your knowledge of current affairs and indian statistics! .... You are so dumb
Aun you dont know what defining something means! You cant give a one or two line definition
of Terrorism becos you dont have one!
7/29/2005 1:01 PM
We are fixated on Pakistan??? That was a good joke. I wonder who else but Pakistanis
start all the anti-India threads in the first place!

You have no idea about all the partnerships India signed in recent years... so next time
think before you type something like that.

About the counterbalance thing... any issue relating to India's national security and foreign
policy is discussed widely in the media and in the Parliament (just today). So, even if USA
or EU wants to improve relations with India for strategic interests, it is in our strategic
Praveen interests to further improve relations with USA, Israel, Japan, EU, Russia, China etc.

India is too big a country to be used as a futbol by other nations, be it USA or EU.

Ya, go ahead and call names as much as you like if you think it helps your country's
cause.
7/29/2005 6:13 AM
The monkey in the suit now identifies himself as the monkey in the suit!

Now that we have established that little fact, the rabid monkey still pulls out figures out of
the air of people dead in Kashmir.

The rabid monkey doesn't understand that the people dead are best estimated at 40000 as
mentioned in the BBC link provided earlier.
Bhaskar
These include:

1. Hindu and Sikh civilians killed by terrorists.
2. Muslims killed by terrorists.
3. Terrorist deaths.

7.60
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

4. Civilian deaths in terrorist-security forces cross-fire.
5. Security personnel killed by terrorists.
6. Civilians killed by sustained Pakistani army cross border firing and shelling along the
long border.
7. Pakistani and Indian soldiers killed in border conflicts including major conflicts like
Kargil.

The rabid monkey doesn't understand that terrorism by infiltrators are down because of
extensive army presence and is solely as a result of Pakistani support materially,
logistically and tactically, that results in Kashmir deaths.
So much for Pakistanis speaking of the Kashmir cause.

The rabid monkey also doesn't understand that by now it is a well established fact that
Pakistan causes terrorism and is seen and known as a terrorist state by the international
community.

The activities and involvement in July 2005 alone prove it.
I still notice that the monkey is tongue tied when it comes to explaining cross border
terrorism when Musharraf has apparently committed himself to peace initiatives with India.

Before this Musharraf's Pakistan has been anything but neighbourly and peaceful.
If this level of activity is the peace time activity in this month of July 2005, one can imagine
Pakistan's support to terrorism in the months' earlier!

7/29/2005 10:45 AM
yeah as baskar said the killings include all.
abt the molestation cases, give the link. several such cases may be happening but that is
not because they are Kashmiris and soldiers are indians!!

Kedar abt the 3 boys killed a week before, the army has apologised, and the slodiers will be court
marshelled. Army also saya that the public outrage is understandable.
@Aun 7/29/2005 5:56 PM
Oh and I almost totally forgot.....your illegal dams, well they are illegal, fait accompli or not!
Though I don't believe what Bhaskar is saying about it, but these kind of statements are
raising doubts about your knowledge.

Can you please provide me the link to original text of Indus Water Treaty, and please to
Prashant stop making a fun of yourself try reading it, before posting the link here.

Hope to have an intelligent discussion with you.
7/29/2005 11:18 AM
Intelligent discussion with him? Man, he is adamant on personal attacks and not even
listening to what others have to say. He has got this feeling that he is always right.

Well, what I can say... the illusion of knowledge is sometimes worse than ignorance!

Praveen
7/29/2005 6:50 PM
I dont have anymore time to waste with you people. I got better things to do. Ciao.

PS: Bhaskar, You are a complete moron.
Prashant, the original text is on the net, find it pal. Use a search engine.
Aun And my dearest friend Praveen, what are you now? A Psycologist? You must really think
something of yourself. Well good for you.
wildily old bhaskar 7/29/2005 1:57 PM
Akber
Aren't you ashamed of what your country and your brethren are doing in Kashmir?

no i am not ashmed cause my country is neither the occupier nor the oppressor and
aggressor.
Akber
these traits specficaly belong to your good ole bharat mata.

whatever justifications you would bring on to justify your country's illegal immoral

7.61
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

occupation of disputed territory would prove your more shamless.
Akber 7/29/2005 6:57 PM
my country is neither the occupier nor the oppressor and aggressor.

A little knowledge is very dangerous.

Aggressor:
Invasion of Kashmir in Sep-Oct 1947.

Occupier :
Occupier of part of Kashmir since then

Oppressor:
Bhaskar 1) 1947 Invasion deaths estimated at 30000, of which 3000 were at Baramullah alone.
Even British residents and nuns in a convent were killed apart from the Hindus. This went
along with rapes.
2)Apart from this, the invasions of Kashmir by Pakistan specifically in 1971 and 1999
caused numerous deaths.
3)Pakistan sponsored terrorism in Kashmir and related conflict deaths from 1988-2005 are
around 40000.

It is sad that if there is one country that supports organised terrorism on a large scale, it is
Pakistan and you should recognise this fact to be first ashamed of it.
bhaskar 8/19/2005 10:21 AM
freedom fighters are terrorists...only an Indian can say dat.

₣ỪŘфẴП
8/19/2005 11:18 AM
what kind of freedom fighters will bomb schools and grounds where local people are
particiapating in independence day function??
i mean all those FREEDOM FIGHTERS are not the locals or from IOK for gods sake.. they
infilterate the border and are from POK...
Kedar The world has seen coward move by Pakistan in Kargil... what else are we going to see
next?
8/24/2005 7:40 AM
In Kargil , "Pakistan's move was corward"!! once again...only an Indian can say dat..

₣ỪŘфẴП
8/24/2005 10:44 AM
yes only an indian can say this.. its really not difficult to climb the hills which do not belong
to u and stay there when the snow is just beginnning to melt and there are no enemy
forces regularly petroling the area!!
Kedar What do u want to say? what ur army did in kargil was an act of bravery or what? the
whole world know what it was!! so chill

8/25/2005 10:09 AM
who says dat area belongs to India..dat is a part of Pakistani territory..

₣ỪŘфẴП
8/25/2005 12:32 PM
Heres an idea, how about I tell you what the Kashmiris want: Independance! And yes, I
have accurate sources, since many journalists I know have visited Kashmir (yes many of
them are Indian) and interviewed Kashmiris. The majority have voted for Independance!
But of course, given the nature of our testosterone filled politicians, this isn't likely to
happen.
Kamil Still, this was to give you a little perspective.
Chew over it!

7.62
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Kamil 8/25/2005 1:48 PM
We believe you Kamil. Also, Israelites are the ones causing trouble in middle east.
Similarly, Chechenya is again the fault of Russians. Also, China is at fault in the dispute
between Kyrghistan and China. Sept. 11 was due to America's own fault. And the Brits
deserved the july attacks.

Muslims are absolutely innocent. They do not cause any problem. They are just being
victimized. Poor muslims.

Rosney
8/25/2005 2:28 PM
as it is a united nation's community so evey 1 shud either abide by UN resolution or shud
immediatly leave the community
n united nation says that kashmir prob shud b resolved by holding a referendom in kashmir
its no use arguing
just do as directed by world community

Mutawassa
m
8/27/2005 8:20 AM
Where did I mention religion? Can someone please point out where I mentioned
"Muslims"? Did I say anything about Israel? Or Chechnya? Or 9/11 or 7/7?
I'd like to draw all of your attentions to the fact that whenever I post a message, Rosney
repeatedly brings religion into the discussion. She has told me that I "don't give a shit if
America invades Latin America tomorrow". Apparently, Rosney thinks that Pakistanis are
incapable of being empathic. She thinks we don't care about anything but Pakistan and
Saudi Arabia. Perhaps she also thinks every Pakistani loathes India and America and is
dying to just get out there and bomb the living daylights out of both countries.
Or wait, here’s a better one, perhaps she thinks I went to school riding an elephant, living in
a mud hut, learning the Quran by heart each day under the pain of death! (Funny thing is,
I've told her repeatedly that I'm Agnostic, but in her fantasy world, I'm sure she thinks all
Agnostics are rooted out by the Mullahs and stoned to death, so she thinks I'm lying about
being an Agnostic!)
Kamil
You people tell me who the stupid one is here. A girl who assumes everything her narrow-
minded and fascist government (which pretends to be democratic) feeds her is true or a
boy younger then her who tries to think with an open mind. A boy who incidentally comes
from a country with a backward government, one that does not pretend to be culturally
diverse or open-minded like her country does. (Though don’t get me wrong, many of the
ideals promoted by the American constitution, even though they’re not followed by the
majority of its citizens are very admirable and universal, hence I follow them).
I could mention numerous other incidents where she has shown her stupidity, but that
would just be a waste of space.
8/27/2005 8:21 AM
Also, try and grasp what I said. I said that the Kashmiris deserved INDEPENDANCE. Not
becoming a part of Pakistan.
I mean this in the fullest sense of the world. I acknowledge that the so-called "Azad
Kashmir" is not so at all (Just to prove to you Bhaskar, that I do not suffer from any mental
illness as you would like to believe and I also do not wear a "Paki Hat" when speaking
about such issues). But enough of this. Enough of it all.

I leave this community telling you that those of you who spread this hate are truly the
wretched of the earth. I am now going to attend an international school, where 16 and 17
year old from all around the world will accomplish more peace and goodwill between their
countries then you fools could ever hope to accomplish in a lifetime. I feel sorry for those of
Kamil you so entrapped in your chains of hatred.
I can only hope that none of you ever find your way into power, because you’d probably
destroy us all (and no, I don’t just mean Muslims as Rosney will no doubt want to say).
I also leave you with a warning: When you attack faiths and beliefs, you become as
dangerous as those you despise. Heed my warning.
If you really want to work on peace, don’t attack, try and reform. At one point, Christianity
was a terror to the world. People were forcibly converted, excommunicated, slain and
worse in the name of Christianity.

7.63
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

But by attacking Islam, you are simply causing more hatred and radicalization. Why call for
eradication, when you can call for reform as some are doing?

But enough of this, I refuse to become involved further. Boil in your hate if you will, I am
above it.
Goodbye. May you all one day mature and grow above these hatreds, lest they consume
you.
Bhaskar Jhoota Hay 8/27/2005 8:48 AM
Bhaskar the liar...
who said that the literacy rate is 15 % in the northern areas!!!
Common the lieracy rate in Hunza alone is 100%. You go to Ghizar and there 80 % of the
people would be literate. You go to Gilgit and again the same ratio. The same ratio stands
true for all regions( districts) of the northern areas. Two years ago the Karakurum
Internatinal Universtiy was established at Gilgit. There is an intermediate collge in almost
all Tehsils. There are two post graduate colleges. There is a Cadet College at Skardu
(Baltistan). And there are at least two high schools in each Tehsil established by the
government.
And there are hundreds of schools operated by the Aga Khan Development Network.
Aazur There are othere private schools run by communities and individuals.

Bhaskar Ji... ghar may beth kay kisi biased site say figures laytay ho aur hamaray samnay
1/2 hoshyari kartay ho.... I am from the northern areas and let me tell you.... there are at
least 1100 students from the northern areas studying in various disciplines at Karachi
University. And I don't know about those who study at all other university..
Kamil 8/27/2005 10:12 AM
INDEPENDANCE.

You guys don't even understand what independence means, people who just believe in
killing and massacring others for their own selfish needs.
Bhaskar Forget others, do you have independence as a country? You people who can't even spell
the word independence right?
shutup every1........ 8/27/2005 11:24 AM
how can u ppl say anything while sitting at ur own homes n jst bcomin couch potatoes??
stop relying entirely on media ppl, u should know by now that its always bias or atleast
most of the time it is so...
u all r jst blabberin dear frnds... plzz let the govts decide wht they have to do, afterall fightin
among urselves wudn't lead to any positive result or wud it??
both indian n pakistani govts have accepted the fact that it is a disputed territory n they hav
Sadia to do sth abt it, so plzz let them resolve it n dun start another issue for them to resolve

take care......dia
8/27/2005 12:24 PM
That is great idea why didnt we think about it tell you what leaving to the government. That
is a laugh neither government can accept to back out neither would and they know it
kashmir is sadly a case of greater problems.
And as for my friends across the border I see that we sitting in Pakistan even on the
borders have no idea what is going on in PHK we dont even know what is right. Oh here is
Zeeshan one Indian Media comes to PAKISTAN and do a complete survey. Let me think.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA .

8/28/2005 3:11 AM
zeeshan i'm sorry i din get even a single thing u wrote man:P please do tell me if any1 got
what he said or zeeshan sahab i wud be really obliged if u can tell me what u meant

Sadia
8/28/2005 12:06 PM
*yawn*
wakes up
ohhh this thread is still on? my god..
Kedar
Bhaskar 8/28/2005 1:51 PM
You guys don't even understand what independence means
Ask your elders. They know better. We were (Indian muslims) who fought for
Independence from Britain & stupid hindus. Unfortunately, your elders & mine fought
Kashif

7.64
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

together for independence and you're here with sick mind that we dont know what
independence is?

people who just believe in killing and massacring others for their own selfish needs.
Stop watching DD1 kind of channels and stop reading "Hindus" kind of newspaper. Go
abroad for studies, you're speaking this shit because it is/was part of your curriculum in
your school/college age.

do you have independence as a country?
Atleast we dont have Organisation fighting for independence from Govt. There are many
organisation in India who are fighting for independence from so called independent India.
I've already posted those in a quite old thread.
kashif........... 8/29/2005 3:21 AM
forgive bhaskar man.......n bhaskar plzzzzzz u also refrain from answering him....... wht are
u ppl goin to get after fightin n bashin like this. i swear u won't get anything. then y not live
n let others live with peace

Sadia take care u all.......dia
8/29/2005 11:30 AM
*sees kasif
sleeps again*
Kedar
8/30/2005 8:47 AM
guz n galz!....plz we r inside a community, which is United Nations.hei learn frm history
...look at all those european nations fought for more than two thousand years....till the 2nd
world war. n now EU is growin like anythin .. infras such as channel tunnel units british n
french today...if brits n french can be frnds...y nt indians n pakis....guyz n galz lets be
positive abt the kashmir issue...put paki-kashmiri religious fundamentalism n our ego
aside...lets rapidly build one strong india, one strong pakistan n also make kashmir nt less
thn any alpine+swiss tourist region..common yaaron...lets religiously believe in
Amitabh "development" and aspire highest possible quality of life....common South Asia!
8/30/2005 9:58 AM
Message to all Indians in this community!

My fellow Indian brothers and sisters, Why waste our time bickering against these
useless,unproductive,PIGSHIT (and I mean it), Pakis in UN community.

Let those paki dogs bark to death and do remember that these barking dogs will never bite
Ratnakar us and that too these street dogs are totally impotent.
8/31/2005 1:01 AM
WOW! Good thing going here guys. We are all just ordinary people of different nations
arguing, abusing and insulting each other. Hmmmmm....I was wondering why we blame
the governments and not the the whole nation. Now I found the answer that the
government of a nation is made of people like us.

Seriously, I have never seen such emotions and hatred towards each other. We are the
same humans....paki, indian, arab, american whatever and we are all striving for the greed
of power that is completely useless by killing so many innocent people whether it comes to
the Kashmir Issue or the US bombing Iraq & Afghanistan or the Palestine and Isreal
conflict. Young Soldiers dying leaving children and familes for nothing.
Tamreez
Come on guys..grow up..I am sure you have much better things to do than pointing at each
other or abusing each other and creating hatred amongst the people. Try to come up with
creative and peaceful solutions not destructive methods.

Take care all of you.
ratnakar bhaiya 8/31/2005 12:22 PM
hats off to u bhai sahab, we had been trying to calm every1 down and here u r dancing on
ur own tune.

khair keep up ur good work, i can't help barking actually:P
Sadia
take care.......dia

7.65
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

i think the solution to this... 9/1/2005 7:23 AM
an independent n free kashmir.. a country of its own..

the situation is just becomin worser day by day.. n is gettin out of hand.. the un cant do
anythin.. who r they goin to support ? india's case.. or pakistan's..

bein a indian,n for the welfare for the people livin in kashmir.. i think an independent
Nishanth country is the solution..

thts whts happenin these days.. afghanistan freed from taliban.. iraq from saddam..

7.66
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

United Nations
http://www.orkut.com/Community.aspx?cmm=4608

Topic: Kashmir Issue
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=5596069&start=121&na=1&nid=

Kashmir Issue 12/27/2004 1:04 PM
...well what do u ppl think is the solution to the core issue between Pakistan and India - the
Jammu and Kashmir Issue...?

Aqib
.... 12/31/2004 12:50 PM
i think everything should be done according to the wishes of the kashmiri people, and
apparently they neither want to be with pakistan nor with india....so why not just let them
have their own country? i know this will cause many problems for both india and pakistan,
but is there a better choice?

Zeshma
12/31/2004 1:45 PM
India says
Kashmir land is mine
Paksitan says
NO, Kashmir land is mine
India... Mera hai
Paksitan... Nahi paggal, bakwaas mat kar.. yeh mera hai
India... Main keh raha hoon na kay yeh mera hai
Paksitan.... Chal Chal.. mera hai
And the war goes on n on n on....
so better leave that issue...its just a DRAMA.. that both the countries r playin wid this poor
nation ..widout even knowin that how much loss Kashmir has to face everyday.. am a
Paksitani but with it. am also a human being and i can feel for my kashmiri brothers n
sisters
MAY GOD BLESS US ALL ,Amen
1/1/2005 12:07 AM
i bet the whole thing has been blown into such a hot topic only because of the bunch of
idiots who rule both the country. If not for politicians this issue would have never come up.
Kaushik
May i know ... ? 1/1/2005 11:51 AM
May i know how this issue won't have come up ... its a problem of a Land & The people
living there in Kashmir ....getting killed by indian forces every day ... Its there Freedom
Problem .
I agree The rulers of both countries had done mistakes in pasts , thats why it is not solved
Faisal yet ...
Kashmie problem need to be solved else it will give Path to a Great War in future n
Personally saying UNO is sleeping
1/1/2005 2:02 PM
How about binding arbitration?

Solution To Kashmir 1/6/2005 11:18 AM
Solution to kashmir Issue is very difficult & easy. Its been made as an issue by the leaders
of both the Nations & the extremist group of the Both sides. I agree there may be some
human rights violation in kashmir at the time of Indepencence. but plz tell me when the
India got seprated whole of India suffered serious human right violations. Now Pakistan
wants back kashmir cause pouplation is majority of Muslims & the Human Rights Violation
in Kashmir. but have they forgotten those trains which came to India from pakistan in
which we received only bloddy & cut peices of bodies. Those were Human Rights Violation
as well.
Pranav
No the Solution is this let India govern its part & Pak govern what it has. Otherwise there
will be only a war. But as in this case in whihc both govern there own parts, after some
time reality will be in front of the whole world that who developes the State better. India or
Pakistan ?
Then the whole world will know who deserves to have the people of kashmir as their

8.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

citizen.
Thanku
Some !!! 1/6/2005 12:51 PM
U must be joking when ur saying "SOME" human rights violation by indians . EveryDay
innocent n freedom fighters are killed in Kashmir by Indian evil forces .
Pakistan wants Kashmir b/c of Muslim majority then Mr. Read out the historical
prespectives ... It was decided in 47 that the regions having MUSLIM majority will join
Pakistan n rest belongs to India but the Indians ( as always ) refused from their words &
attacked Kashmir , Hyderabad (Dakan) n many muslim states ...
If u Indians are so confident then why don't u ppl arrange polling in Kashmire under UNO n
let Kashmiri people decide where they wanna go . ( Best Solution )
Faisal Pakistan supports Kashmiri Freedom Movement n we ppl will till Death ( Inshallah ) .
U know the trains which reach from Pakistan to India ... wht U ppl ( Hindu n Sikh ) did to
our trains which Came Pakistan from India in bloody mess n everywhere there were killed
peoples . (I hope u would like to go in history ) .

If Pakistan was ever wrong on Kashmir issue then there would have been a freedom
movement in the Kashmir tht Pakistan's part now .
Tell me IF u Indians are right then why there is Freedom Movement ???????????
1/6/2005 9:45 PM
Shouldn't you have the right to decide your own future and destiny? A person is a master
of his own fate. But not so in the lives of Kashmiris. All the Kashmiris have ever been
asking for is a plebicite(excuse the spellings please) to determine their own future and
lifestyle. Is it too much to ask for? No. Kashmiris should have their right to self
determination. Thats a promise that India made at the international level. And approx. 40+
Usman years after that promise, India still hasnt fulfilled its obligations for a plebiscite. One should
not be suppressed against ones wishes of how to live one's life. This is exactly whats
happening in Kashmir.
1/6/2005 10:49 PM
We live in interesting times - especially in Europe, with the European union becoming
much more of a nation every day. De iure the EU is an international organization - de facto
it's a federal republic: Own constitution, own parliament, own laws above member state
legislation, own police, own currency, etc., etc.

On the other hand, people in some areas apparently believe they need their own nation, or
Daniel be part of a different nation, based on the interpretation of their heritage of the day. Isn't
that something of an anachronism? Can't everybody just get along? Come on - as if
nationality had any influence on who you are!

Nationality ... 1/7/2005 2:43 AM
Yes Nationality represent Wht we are & From where we belong ...It tells us wht culture we
have ...it tells us wht religion n moral values we have for our selves n for others . Kashmiri
people should be given a chance to decide themselves, With Whom They wanna Live ...

EU , Well if different states or nations incide ur continent doesn't want their own country
identity Then in no way U can impose same logic on other parts of world.
Faisal If this is the case why u people resisted Germany in world war 2 ... Hitler also wanted 1
nation of course ok!
Secondly EU is biast b/c they are not giving TURKEY a chance to join , rather are making
lame excuzes , so It makes ur united concept of EU wrong here .
Kashmiri People are killed everyday n UNO is just watching like a Dead Dog .
1/7/2005 3:14 AM
Definitely Kashmir should have a plebisite. But only after the thousands of Hindu Kashmiri
Pundits have been rehabilitated in Kashmir. They had been terrorized and chased away by
the Pakistan sponsored terrorists.
So until they are back, there can be no plebisite.
Gautam And once the plebisite is done, we should respect its results.
1/8/2005 11:57 AM
First If ur 1 million force are eating bananas there is Kashmir , then Better Keep Them in
Zoo . ( Eventually U will )
Kashmir Was never a Hindu majority Region ...Always a Muslim Majority Region n It is
today too .
Faisal It is a Freedom Movement Going on in Kashmir , n The Kashmiri ppl are fighting for their
own rights against the illegal act of Indians .

8.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

n Mr. As far as i know , India is a secular country not a Hindu country , so making
difference between Hindu n Muslims or Sikhs ... U r deviating from ur Countries main
feature of being Secular ( Although on ground its totally wrong n Indians should be
ashamed of wht Human Rights Violation occur in India )
1/8/2005 12:46 PM
A plebisite cannot take place if a big portion of the population is displaced.
Kashmiri pundits are Hindus but are Kashmiris. They should have a right to decied their
fate as well. But the kashmir struggle has taken more of an islamic tone now and these
Kashmiri pundits, who are also Hindu, have been chased away from the kashmir valley.
They are housed in shelters in delhi and other places.
These pundits have not got enough media attention and so not many are aware of their
predicament.
And by the way the state of Jammu and Kashmir in India has three distinct identities -
Gautam Kashmir, Jammu and Ladakh.

And Kashmir is a muslim majority area but the pundits are ( or rather were) the minorities
there.
1/8/2005 12:49 PM
For those eager to understand the geo-political problem in Kashmir, this aspect of Kashmiri
pundit should be known. You all can refer this site about the sufferings of the pundits.
http://www.kashmiri-pandit.org/atrocities/

Defintely, the Kashmir issue can be solved through the plebisite option once all standing
issues are resolved, including return of the pandits and the representation of the buddhists
Gautam of ladakh area.
1/8/2005 1:37 PM
Plebiscite?

India and Pakistan have both deposited to the Registrar of the International Court of Justice
declarations in which they recognize the compulsory jurisdiction of that Court.

The fact that these two States haven't submitted the dispute to the Court, or to an Arbitral
tribunal, indicates to me that these States are unwilling to settle the dispute through
peaceful means.

Rather, they seem to want to ensure possession over territory through military means.

In sum, the international community is far more concerned with the settlement of the
dispute than the Government of India and Paskitan themselves.

Let's not forget, my friends, that Governments 'adore' an international or regional
crisis in times of national difficulties.

It inflates love for the 'motherland', patriotism, it shifts public opinion in favor of the
Government, it promotes a sense of competition with foreign nations that allows the
Government to speed up the decision-making process, that is to say, to put the
Executive branch of the Government above the Legislative and Judicial powers.

Hence, it is my opinion that a decision, or a settlement of the dispute, on the
Kashmir issue does not interesting India any more than it interests Pakistan, for
their regional "Cold War" (Just take a glance at the "Nuclear Race" recently
promoted by them) promotes internal political stability.
1/8/2005 1:54 PM
hence it's my opinion that mr. hugo u keep ur bug nose out of this issue that's related to
indo-pak only....

Mayukh
1/8/2005 3:36 PM
"The fact that these two States haven't submitted the dispute to the Court, or to an Arbitral
tribunal, indicates to me that these States are unwilling to settle the dispute through
peaceful means. "
James

8.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

So the only roads to peaceful resolution is this court or tribunal?
1/8/2005 9:29 PM
Hindu Pandit !!! I think u would have to count their votes several times to win a voting under
international community .

Ur refereing me a weblink , have u ever visited Kashmir , wht goes their on the people
living there . EveryDay many Kashmiri people r killed , just coz they are fighting for freedom
. Why don't u ask the Kashmiri living in ther countries , under political sheltor rule tht Who is
creating Mess .
Faisal The Division of Sub-Continent was based on religion , if u might remember ... So The
Kashmiri Freedom Fighters are Muslims as Kashmir is a Muslim Region .
When Sikh rose to get independance from India , then those freedom fighters were Sikh ,
as Punjab was mostly hold by Sikhs ...SO IN THE END , THE REGIONAL CULTURE
MATTERS
U might wanna take a look at other Freedom Moverment going in other Parts of India
The demographic composition of Jammu and Kashmir. 1/8/2005 10:55 PM
Hindus are 30 % of the total population in J&K. But they are in decline in Kashmir because
of the exodus of the pandits.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_12-9-2004_pg7_42

Rising of some fringe groups in the country is not considered "freedom struggle".
Gautam

1/9/2005 3:07 AM
"So the only roads to peaceful resolution is this court or tribunal?"

No, James. You can also acquire peace once your enemy has been completely wiped out
of the face of the earth. Then you will have no one to be 'not in peace' with.

And if you were referring to settlement through diplomatic means, it seems to me those
have pretty much been exhausted.

I mean, Indian and Pakistani negotiations on the Kashmir issue are something to be proud
about, right?

Moreover, the ICJ has a history of solving territorial disputes. Just check its website:
www.icj-cij.org
Mayukh 1/9/2005 3:12 AM
"hence it's my opinion that mr. hugo u keep ur bug nose out of this issue that's related to
indo-pak only...."

This statement only reinforces my position that it is not of the interest of either India or
Pakistan to have their dispute come to a peaceful end.
1/10/2005 2:44 AM
@Hugo ....
Well ur completely a Nonsense person , U don't have any logic in ur words ... so go
somewhere else n duck around .
Faisal Fools Rush Around Everywhere
1/10/2005 2:52 AM
30% of Kashmiris were Hindus ... Are u Joking , who told u this , Any Pandit or Any Indian
news Channel or Newspaper .

The Links ur refereing me , are u sure they are from independant news agencies ??? aren't
they frm Indian side ...Better check around n Stop fooling urself atleast .

3rd , Some ppl , u r joking ... Have u ever seen wht is the turn around during polling days in
Kashmir ( Illegal n InJustice ) ...not more than 2-6% ...
Faisal In This was any radical issue then it wouldn't have been on UNO desks ...it wouldn't have
beena Fight tht would have made the Policies of both countries for last 57 years.

Its Indian side , who want to rule simple ppl of kashmir through Amry & small number of
punks who don't have any status in the eyes of Ordinary Kashmiri people .

8.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Let Kashmiri Decide wht they want , under UNO observation .
1/10/2005 3:06 AM
The link I gave is from the pakistani site
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_12-9-2004_pg7_42
Its the daily times.
And even I say that let the Kashmiris decide but when is the question ?
(a). when terrorism has stopped. Pakistan stops funding and sheltering the terrorists.
(b). when the kashmiri pandits have been brought back to the kashmir valley and given
protection. they dont blame the kashmiri muslims but the foreign merceneries from
afghanistan and pakistan
(c). when issues regarding the other minority communities in Kashmir are resolved.

Thats it. If these basic requirements are fulfilled then yes, the kashmiris can select their
Gautam future freely. But not when terrorist attack and soil their economy

And why was the voter's participation low ?
The terrorists had threatened the people not to vote. And that the voting % ws near 30% is
a good sign. Inspite of all odds, Kashmiris came out to vote and elect their leaders.

Karshmir is very much back on track today. The foreign merceneries have been subdued to
a great extent.
Well !!! 1/10/2005 5:52 AM
Well I had seen the Link , n i asked u isn't the status given in the column according to
Indian Census report ??? I hope u would say yes to this ...
in Pakistani print Media , u will see many articles n reports regarding to Indian prespective
b/c we give ppl a chance to hear the rival country views too .
Secondly , In that report there is not a single pharse saying tht b/c of Freedom Fight the
Hindus Have left ( Although Many Indian claims are bogus but Considering Report right for
sometimes )
Wht u will say , Christains population have increased , so do freedom fighter Love
Christains haan ???

U say it terrorism , we call it Freedom Fight , A fight that only Kashmiri ppl are fighting for
Faisal their own rights .
N Again , i would say if ur army is just blind , which is on LOC ( mind u Line of Control , Not
a Border ) then build a Eye Hospital in Kashmir . Because ur Army is not Army then Just
Puppets .
We support Our Kashmiri Brothers on political ground as they are part of us & Kashmiri
also don't have any ashame in calling themselves Pakistanis .
30% , ur joking ... After 1980 ( when freedom struggle boosted ) , U never has such
percentage in polls .
n in Polls sense , Wht is ur amry doing when ppl r being threatened ???????
UN 1/10/2005 6:55 AM
I am sorry, but if you guys don't want others, beside Indian and Pakistanis to discuss this,
why have are you discussing in the UN community??!! Go create a community for you
guys...

I very much agree with Hugo's position, since the two parties haven't agreed in anything
(beside the several meetings and 50 years of discussion), India and Pakistan should ask
Vivek for a unpartial opinion. And in this sense, I believe that the international court might be a
good option... we can see Timor Leste as a good example of how disputes were
democratically solved, even though it was a much simpler case...
1/10/2005 9:37 AM
Pakistan watend to go to the international court and India didnt agree......the reason being
that India is wrong on the Kashmir issue.

Legally there should have benn a census in Kashmir, but India didnt allow it to Happen!!!!!!
Just because Kashmir would become a part of Pakistan. According to the Radcliffe Award
it was Pakistans right over Kashmir but India didnt allow it.

According to Law there should be a poll is Kashmir, even Pakistan and India agreed on it.
Mustafa But it was India who said that it would not pull out its forces of Kashmir. Then how come
Pakistan have belived India who has stabbed Pakistan in the back so many times.

According to Simla Pact, India has to allow Pakistan to go to International court, but as

8.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

India is wrong it wont allow Pakistan to go to the International court.

I agree that draging Kashmir Issue for this long it totally the fault of both the countries, and
other nations also.

Most of the blame goes to the veto powers, it is because they want to make thier economy
stronger by selling us expensive weapons.They know that how much money we are
wasting on our military needs just because of the Kashmir issue, when certain people dont
have anything to eat.

I think now we, the neXt generation should do any thing to get Pakistan, India and Kashmir
out of this problem.

I personally think that there should be a poll in Kashmir, werather they want to go with
Pakistan, India or get Independant. Afterall its their land and lives and we have no right
over it.
1/10/2005 7:11 PM
Thank you Vivek for bringing some reasonability to the issue.

We, as outsiders, are able to see the matter from a more IMPARTIAL and
UNPASSIONATE manner. Our opinion is valid mainly to the extent that it carries those
qualities.

I do not, at any rate, believe that discussion among yourselves will lead to anything else
than, say, a degeneration into mutual swearing and cursing, as I have seen before in this
very community, with respect to the very same issue.
i 2nd u mr hugo! 1/11/2005 3:49 AM
it is fact tht we being very patriotic on an international forum fail to see tht both the
governments are playing with the feelings of their ppl. if the war in kahmir stops right now
then there will be no excuse for spending so much money on defence issues and not
spending any money on the welfare of the ppl.
and mr hugo the reason y ppl r so emotional abt the issue is because at school and other
levels we dont see both sides of the story regarding india and pakistan.now tht media is
Emmen more free becaus eof musharaf tensions shud soon come down and more and more ppl
have started to cross the border and visit each other the tensions wil be relived and
hopefully issues like kashmir wud be sloved soon according to the wishes of the ppl of tht
area because nither india or pakistan can force their decisions on them.

1/11/2005 4:18 AM
Here's a brief Résumé of the Court on territorial disputes:

Sovereignty over Certain Frontier Land (Belgium/Netherlands) (1957-1959)

Temple of Preah Vihear (Cambodia v. Thailand) (1959-1962)

Frontier Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali) (1983-1986)

Land, Island and Maritime Frontier Dispute (El Salvador/Honduras: Nicaragua
intervening) (1986-1992)

Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (Cameroon v. Nigeria:
Equatorial Guinea intervening) (1994-2002)

Kasikili/Sedudu Island (Botswana/Namibia) (1996-1999)

Frontier Dispute (Benin/Niger) (2002-

Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia) (2001-

Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge
(Malaysia/Singapore) (2003-

You won't find any organ more experienced than this.

8.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1/11/2005 5:36 AM
And in this sense, I believe that the international court might be a good option

and then we'll have ppl crying for "impartial" ppl for solving the issues of north-east... yeah
the world looks beautiful from germany.. come and have alook at the ground realities)....

then we might have foreign powers trying to solve all our internal issues... what an idea....
just allow everyone else to meddle in our affairs.....

Mayukh again...kashmir is an issue concerning india and pakistan and others need not b
concerned about it.... rest can be better off pondering o'er the problems of their respective
nations......let's respect the sovereignity of the nations....
1/11/2005 8:19 AM
When the first nuclear warhead is detonated, will it still be a problem exclusivelly pertaining
to India and Pakistan?
1/13/2005 11:03 PM
had there been christans in Kashmir then America would have got it free 50 years ago just
like they did to Eastimore

Mustafa
Chenab Formula 1/14/2005 7:36 AM
i think that chenab formula is best solution of the kashmir dispute in which river chenab will
act as a netural boundary between india and pakistan.

BEFORE REPLING THIS PLEASE READ THAT WHAT CHENAB FORMULA IS!!!

Rana
Chenab Formula 1/14/2005 7:37 AM
i think that chenab formula is best solution of the kashmir dispute in which river chenab will
act as a netural boundary between india and pakistan.

BEFORE REPLING THIS PLEASE READ THAT WHAT CHENAB FORMULA IS!!!

Rana
1/15/2005 1:08 AM
can u plz tell me about the chenab formula?

Mustafa
Chenab Formula 1/15/2005 1:27 AM
it is a plan which gives kashmir , lakdah and some muslim majority districts of jumma to
pakistan and the rest of disputed state to india. it would be a fair solution as the partition
would be on religious base and all muslim majority areas will go to pakistan (including
lakdah which is 60%muslin)and all hindu majority areas to india. it would be a peaceful
solution which would lead to stability in the region

Chenab Formula ... peaceful solution of kashnir issue...stabiltiy in the region...redution in
Rana defence expenditure...economic development in the region....poverty in the region wipe out

so the chenab formula is the best possilbe solution of this issue
1/15/2005 4:11 AM
Does the Government of India share that opinion?

1/15/2005 6:51 AM
i dont think so but the people of india and pakistan because they are fed up of this dispute

Rana

8.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1/15/2005 9:47 AM
But what abt the original partition plan. It was supposed to be a state, take the example of
Hyderabad, Muslim family ruled it, and the majority was hindu, so Hyderabad went to India.

I think it would be unfair to give Kashmit to India according to the actual partition plan.
Mustafa
1/16/2005 1:40 AM
I agree with Mustafa ... Why r we ppl making plans & formula's ...
The Game is simple ... Let kashmiris decide wht their future is ...

" Let their be polling in kashmiri supervised by UNO or any Humanitarian Agency & Let
kashmiri people decide With Whom they want to go . " , Whts Wrong in this approch .
Faisal
N remember According to all partition rulz , geographically & according to all modern rulz
too , " KASHMIR IS A PART OF PAKISTAN "
1/16/2005 2:08 AM
Faisal the thing is that Pakistan is wanting to go to UNO but according to the simla pact
Pakistan can only take the Kashmir issue to a third prty if India allows.

But India dosent want to go to a third party because India is wrong on the Kashmir issue
and the result would b that Pakistan would get Kashmir......
Mustafa
So now the only troubble is simla pact! i.e India.
Agree ... 1/18/2005 3:37 AM
I agree Mustafa tht If India took this Issue to third Party , India's Reality will be opened to
World n The World will knw How much violance India has created in kashmir .

--> Coming to bilateral Talks , India has never Obeyed any Treaty or resolution ...
There r many resolutions n Treaties which Indians have never Obeyed ... recent is
Faisal
"INDUS WATER TREATY" , By making BAGLIAR DAM ... Again Betraying & Decieving ,
The Hand of friendship from Pakistan .
1/18/2005 10:09 AM
faisal talkin abt betrayal ....i can write a full book on betrayals frm the pakistan side.Pak
leader(rather i say now an indirect one)cannot be trusted at all.I don't remember even one
situation when he kept his words..Pak is a master of "BETRAYING OTHERS".And adding
to this, today only PAK broke the ceasefire treaty by firing in punj sector.

Gaurav One thing more...faisal u talk abt condition of people in kashmir..have u ever been to
kashmir?I think no.And every opinion u form is on the basis of news agency's and other
media..(i doubt their trustworthiness..).
@gaurav ... 1/18/2005 12:33 PM
Whenever I have said anything abt India , i have delivered wht i mean ...U can see my
previous post ...I said India is betraying on BAGLIAR DAM ...
So I would also like to read few chapters on ur book ... Would u like to quote some incident
. I will be waiting , then i will tell where India is wrong .

--> Well , u guessed wrong , I have been to Kashmir , i m basically from a LOC area . U
don't know whts happening there ... Have u ever been to India .
Faisal -- > When ur cursing Media , then From where u heard tht pakistan broke Cease Fire ???
Were u at LOC then , when this happened haan ????

--> The problem is that we cannot fire bullets across border , The reason is not that we Like
India ...Reason is tat Basically on Other side to Muslims live ...& we have to think this
before taking any action . OtherWise ... U don't know wht would have happened .
a question 2evryone 1/19/2005 10:24 PM
Do u think United nations really would like 2 solve the kashmir Issue ?

Tushar

8.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Kashmir in history 1/20/2005 3:15 AM
The time when this dispute started a portion of Kashmir was with India and the other with
Pakistan. Both the portions were governed by the respective governments. There was a
prime minister of the Indian held Kashmir and there was and still is a prime minister elected
by the people of the Pakistan held Kashmir, there is a president also there. India on the
other hand passed a bill in its parliament and included its portion of the Kashmir into the
Indian union. Hugo enlighten us if it is legal, and if any one can lead me to the actual text of
Syed the UN Kashmir resolutions. Not only Hugo is a part of the discussion on Kashmir, I wish
the people of whole world gets here and post their comments.
1/20/2005 11:54 AM
well like passing a bill in parliment pakistan declaers that india is its part..... it can never
become its part. the only reality is kashmir is disputed, passing any bill in parliment doent
makes kashmir indias part......

Mustafa
The Parliaments of Pakistan and India 1/21/2005 12:28 PM
Just try to be bold, impartial and accept the fact. Compare the credibility of the two
parliaments: of Pakistan and India. Our parliament is subservient to a military dictator who
is interested in serving the interest of the Big Power only. The solution to this problem is
only by the struggle if it suits US and it is willing to reconcile with the idea of freedom
Syed movement and willing to differentiate it with the terrorism.

1/23/2005 3:27 AM
if we dont act accordingly to the wish of a superpower then what will become of
us...........Afghnistan,Iraq and so on.......

In reality it is America who decides the fate of Kashmir, not India & Pakistan.

Mustafa
1/23/2005 9:16 PM
Kashmir should be an independent country!

Roberta
1/23/2005 9:16 PM
Kashmir should be an independent country!!!!

Roberta
Roberta and others 1/25/2005 12:36 AM
Kashmir should be an independent country!
Kashmir should be an independent country!!!!

You must be having some reason to conclude this?

Syed
1/25/2005 10:21 AM
...............and some way to do it..........

Mustafa

8.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

1/25/2005 12:21 PM
@mustafa

if we dont act accordingly to the wish of a superpower then what will become of
us...........Afghnistan,Iraq and so on.......

In reality it is America who decides the fate of Kashmir, not India & Pakistan.

are these the words of a citizen of a "sovereign" country?
the ppl who can't honour their own independence talk of defending others'
...preposterous...
Mayukh
and @roberta

nice prophecy....
Let's talk Kashmir! 2/1/2005 6:36 AM
FACT 1. Kashmir - the name itself is derived from Sage Kashyapa, a Hindu sage. Srinagar
the capital is named after Sri, a divine goddess who was the manifestation of the Goddess
Lakshmi.
So there is a historical Hindu claim on the area.

FACT 2. India was divided on majority religious lines, only in specific parts of India. And
the line drawn by the British was binding on both sides as the official boundary. There was
no such line drawn for Kashmir.

FACT 3. Kashmir was an independent legal entity operating AFTER the independence of
both India and Pakistan. Kashmir, signed a legal document called THE INSTRUMENT OF
ACCESSION that agreed for being part of India.

FACT 4. This legal document was signed, AFTER the Pakistanis invaded, so that India
could legally intervene on the matter, as insisted by Mountbatten, the then Gov in General.

FACT 5. India rushed in troops to Kashmir, to halt the advance. Mountbatten pressurised
Bhaskar the Indian leaders from going on an attack to reclaim all occupied territory as he felt that
the newly empowered UN was set up precisely for that and the matter would be easily
won over by India, given the fact that it had an iron-clad legal case.So India went to the
UN.

FACT 6. Pakistan insisted on a plebiscite. India agreed PROVIDED Pakistan withdrew all
its troops and men from the occupied area. Pak refused. Instead it started an aggressive
re-settlement campaign. The UN, powered by its founding constituent members did not
intervene. Which is the reason India does not permit any mediation/intervention now, it felt
let down!
More so as it emerged that Mountbatten did not want India to be aggressive and reclaim
the occupied land, because, it would have meant that British Army officers on both sides
would have fought each other. It would have been a blow to Brit diplomacy to peacefully
solve a problem...and he did not want Pakistan which was already on the brink of
bankruptcy to get destroyed financially.
Such an event would again reflect poorly on the British!
Let's talk Kashmir - 2 2/1/2005 7:10 AM
Fact 1. Pakistan insists on talking about taking care of Kashmir interests, only from the
Muslim view-point. But they split their occupied part of Kashmir into 3 parts as it stands
today.

Fact 2. They created a tiny sliver of land, half the size of Israel, and called it "Azad
Kashmir" ( Free Kashmir) and completed the charade by appointing a Prime Minister for
this bit of land!

Fact 3. The remaining area consisting of Baltistan and the area around Gilgit, were
Bhaskar ambiguously called the Northern Areas and incorporated within Pakistan!
This area has no constitutional rights that are available to say another state of Pakistan,
such as Punjab.

Fact 4. They gifted a portion of this Northern Area to China in return for the Chinese effort
in building the Karakorram highway.

8.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Fact 5. Having done all this, they could not remain content in maintaining status quo and
keeping peace. They continued with the Stalinist phiosophy of forced resettlement in
Kashmir from other areas, so they would always be in control of the situation.

Fact 6. The Pak military set-up did not want democracy in Pak and be subject to the
dictum of politicians under a democracy...so they kept up the mischief of breeding
terrorism in the name of Islamic jehad.

Fact 7. The US dependency on Pak during and after the Afghan invasion, saw the army
geting funds, money and arms, to actively support this.

Fact 8. They were also a conduit for the poppy money flowing thru them from Afghanistan.
This enriched coffers for terrorist financing.

Fact 9. When they were confronted with proof of supporting terrorism...satellite photos of
camps, mobile phone conversation intercepts, and IDs of various terrorists caught
crossing... they flatly lied about any such support and blamed the inhospitable border, for
misguided people doing what they did.

Fact 10. Pakistan is a dictatorship. Run by the Army for most part of its history. And the
WEST still maintain their quiet support to every successive regime. That is the TRUTH!

FACE IT!!
Kashmir Issue 2/1/2005 7:57 AM
Kashmir issue.
Kashmir we all know is very emotional issue for both India and Pakistan, we all know it
and that is the reason why its not solved so far. We all know the price each country is
paying for not settling this simple but almost impossible problem to solve. In reality the
people of Kashmir paying the price with their lives and economy. The same people who
lived there for who know for how long may be hundreds of Years, yet the very partition
should have helped for better life but brought more misery to Kashmir.
We have heard lot of facts but no solution .For the last fifty Years with a few wars and a
stalemate .
Suppose if we leave the present line of control as is and the portion which is in each
Dilawar country stay the way it is for the last fifty Years. All the armies move out ,the border
between two portions of Kashmir are open for the people to freely move without any
restrictions .Kashmir would follow more like EU.
I feel the Kashmiri people may like this , both Pakistan and India should except this. Even
India and Pakistan should have an open boarder let the people live where ever they like
and let the goods and services move freely. Both countries and its people will prosper.
Both countries should have no nuclear secrets and should join in research and
development.
People will live happy ever after.
2/1/2005 8:08 AM
Resolution adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January 1957,
concerning the India–Pakistan Question

The resolution is a reaffirmation of the Security Council resolution of 30 March 1951 that
the convening of a Constituent Assembly and any action taken by it would not constitute
disposition of the State in accordance with the will of the people of Kashmir expressed
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the
auspices of the United Nations. It was introduced by Australia, Colombia, Cuba, the United
Kingdom and the U.S.A., and supported by 10 members of the Council, the Soviet Union
abstaining.

The Security Council,

Syed Having heard statements from representatives of the Governments of India and Pakistan
concerning the dispute over the State of Jammu and Kashmir,

Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and

8.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,

1. Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have taken
or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or
any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such action by the
Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above
principles;

2. Decides to continue its consideration of the dispute.

24

Objectivity??? 2/2/2005 3:27 AM
@ Dilawar/Syed

Where is the objectivity in your responses to the facts stated by me?

@Dilawar

You say it is an emotional issue.
I differ. It is a cut and dry legal issue, with absolutely nothing to support the Pakistani case
for Kashmir.

It does not matter how you feel about Kashmir... it is immaterial.
When you are confronted with TRUTH and JUSTICE bow your head to the legal
processes demanded by all civil societies.

@ Syed

It appears you have not read my post at all.
It was India that complained to the UN asking for justce.
India agreed to a plebiscite under the condition, that all Pakistani tribes and army who
moved into Kashmir after agression EXIT immediately!
Bhaskar
This was necessary, to ensure that only the Kashmiris vote and none other masquerading
as Kashmiris or claiming to belonging to Kashmir.

Pakistan refused to do this.
The UN didn't implement Pakistani withdrawal then... so where is the question of talking
of plebiscite now after so many years?

In fact, having understood the strong merits of the case that India has at hand, based on
the events leading to the Instrument of Acccession, no right minded Indian will ever permit
a plebiscite!
Its just a matter of LAW and JUSTICE!

Don't whine about the plebiscite, what is the case that you have based on the facts that I
have mentioned above, in my previous post?

If you or any Pakistani, have a case, counter me lucidly and objectively, point by point.

Cheers!
2/3/2005 5:13 AM
It is very strange logic! India agrees to plebiscite Pakistan does not withdraw its so called
army and tribes men and India occupies the territory, doesn’t go to the court? Can a
wrong action rectify a wrong doing if any? Why people of Kashmir suffer? Why India
keeps such a huge army stationed in Kashmir? Why is India afraid to let the UN peace
keepers watch and report the truth if there is cross border terrorism? How many civilians
in Kashmir have been killed by the Indian army? What is the psychological condition of
your soldiers stationed in the occupied territory? Let the Kashmiries decide what is good
Syed for them. Since there is a difference of opinion amongst the quarreling parties, let the UN
deliberate on the matter and decide what is right. Your government is no better, than our
generals, in dealing with the areas of unrest in India. Should I inform you that your army
men throw out of fast moving train poor civilians who were trying to board the train?

8.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

THE REAL TRUTH 2/3/2005 5:22 AM
India only went to uno becouse it was on the brink of HUMILATING DEFEAT at the hands
of pakistani tribal forces.the pakistani commander of armed forces General Cracy never
properly attacked because he did not had orders of Lord Mountbatten pakistan was only
forced to attack to defend it frontier.Had pakistan moved a division or even a battalion or
regiment in Kashmir at the proper time whole of kashmir would had been with pakistan
Rana and all of us would not had been talking here on this issues
@ Pakis 2/3/2005 5:42 AM
Listen guys,

Have you even read what I have written?

Does chronology of events matter or not?

There can never be any solution if you assume an ostrich in the sand approach and deny
what happened.

If you don't what happened why don't you read up the events of that time... there are
plenty of neutral sources.

If you have indeed understood and knew what happened why don't you refute point by
point, the FACTS laid out by me.

You don't have a legal leg to stand on.

But you still somehow dream that you are right.

Bhaskar It must be the effect of the Afghan poppies working on you!

You support the Plaestine cause don't you based on religion ... so let me ask you a simple
question for your tiny brains.

Which religion came first to Palestine, Judaism or Islam?
Since it is Judaism, who should the land belong to?

Now which religion came first to Kashmir, Hinduism or Islam?
Since it is Hinduism, who should the land belong to?

Think about it!

Why do you think India supports Israel?

Now sleep over this!!!

Cheers!
@baskar 2/3/2005 10:46 AM
well in that all the muslim countries have no right to exist??? are u nuts???

and these are not the facts but complete lies!

Mustafa
Back up your statement! 2/3/2005 11:42 AM
@Mustafa

If the FACTS that I put up are lies, prove it to me.

Prove it to me by disproving the FACTS put up with sources and links.
Bhaskar
And which Muslim countries have no right to exist, according to you?

Cheers!

8.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Who should decide the Fate of Kashmir 2/4/2005 1:58 AM
IF looked at in a very neutral way, I believe Kashmir's Fate shouldn't be decided by
Pakistan nor India. Kashiri people have been fighting very hard for along time so its only
fair if they are given the right to choose their future. Pakistan and India should stop their
fighting as its gettting both countries no where and both are spending huge amounts
trying to win control of the place. This only seems to be the honest way of dissolving the
issue. Pakistan and India should both be preaurised to stop saying that Kashmir belongs
Subhan to them, as the Kashmiris are the only ones who have the right to decide their Fate.
@ Abdul 2/4/2005 5:32 AM
There is nothing neutral about your stand...it just reflects mal-intent.

Besides, your stand and that of Pakistan has no basis and grounding on law. If you want
to dispute this, you would have to disprove all the FACTS that I had put up point by point.

There are more than 25 states in India each of which have a unique culture, language
and tradition and is an admixture of various religions.
All of them work within the Indian identity.

Incidentally the undivided opinion of the Muslims in India, also support the inclusion of
entire Kashmir within India, and these Muslims number 150 million!
I'm sure this comes as a surprise to you.
Your mosque driven propaganda wouldn't have told you this.

Pakistan attacked a soveriegn state and occupied it, a state that signed the Instrument of
Accession with India, for its safety and protection from Pakistan.
Pakistan has thus no "locus standi" as far as Kashmir, is concerned in a court of law.

The Kashmir "fighting" started after Zia Ul Huq, came to power in Pakistan. The guy who
Bhaskar hung the democratically elected PM of Pakistan. He is the one who sent in arms,
ammunition and jehadis through the porous border... and this rich murderous tradition of
Pakistan continues till this day.

Pakistan not only supports terrorism in India, but in other parts of the world too. Numerous
international terrorists linked to Pakistan. It's no secret, that Al-Qaeda and Osama is
being given refuge in Pakistan.
India's most wanted criminals have been given refuge and sanctuary in Pakistan.

You guys should first de-criminalise your attitude and behaviour before being termed
civilised. More than half the independent life of Pakistan has been under the military. That
should tell you something loud and clear.

You guys, whine and raise the Kashmir issue, in every international forum.
The international community diplomatically listened to you at first, now they are sick of
you!
With the sort of culture that you propagate, you then wonder why!
2/4/2005 6:48 AM
The dismissal of a popularly elected prime minister M.K. junjeo was purely an interal issue
of pakistan and he did according to powers given to him by the pakistani constitution.God
knows better that who was behind the insurgency in Kashmir but it were the people of
Kashmir who carried out the insurgency meaning there opposition to indian occopution
Rana
@ Bhaskar 2/7/2005 2:22 AM
Dear friend i believe u haven't done ur homework properly.
If I ask how many killings go on in Kkasmir due to indian forces, u might say that thats
India's business as Kashmir is their's.
Well ur propagada on how good u people are and how bad Pakistan is won't sole the
issue would it?
U talk about facts but as given to u before ur facts are NOTHING BUT LIES. And this is
the best thing that is done by u.
If u talk about what has been taught to me or others in our mosque, well then i can say
the same about ur Mandirs. What have u learnt from them. To fight!!!
Subhan And please prove that we are supporting terrorism. On that i think u should look at India.
India doesn't lett people say what they want!!!!!! And u call Pakistan bad. This just goes
on to prove how narrow minded u are.
When I although being a Pakistani wrote that niether Pakistan nor India should have a

8.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

say on Kashmir and the people of Kahmir and only them have the right to choose their
future, u started writing about propaganda and other bad thing to me .
I for one want both India and Pakistan to unite and be able to show the world a better
picture, but u in return just want to say the bad things about Pakistan. Well dear friend If
Pakistan is bad and we keep bad thoughts and cry out, i believe i'm justified in saying why
don't u look at ur selves and ur country because u do the same!!!! In other words if
Pakistan is bad India is worse if not the same!!!!
We raise our voice because we are asking for justice but u in turn raise ur voice to stop us
in the fear that people might hear ourside of the story and act accordingly. So i propose
that u should have an open mind when writing about these issues or if u don't know u
should keep silent.

2/7/2005 8:45 AM
Leave aside Kashmir for a moment. Just ponder who wrong you people were accusing
your fellow citizens for burning the train in Gujarat and ultimately it is proven by your own
court that it was an accident. All this is because of narrow mindedness of your leaders and
intellectuals. Don’t you think you are evasive and not replying to how your soldiers killed
your own fellow country men by throwing them out of a fast moving train?
I am not praising our generals, your leaders and generals are worst.
Syed
@Abdul 2/7/2005 9:23 AM
You are getting all emotional.
That is what creates problems for Pakistanis in understanding basic things.

I have listed several FACTS about Kashmir.
You cannot refute it. So you just say they are lies. Now what credibility do you have?

It is also fact that Pakistan for most of its life, has been ruled by the military.
That is a shame.
The message that it tells the outside world is that the Pakistani people cannot govern
themselves through a democratic process. You judge for yourself.

Then you act surprised that the entire world knows that Pakistan supports terrorism. You
thought it was some secret?
Not in the 21st century, when there are satellites, or tracking devices that can monitor
phone conversations anywhere in Pakistan!
Remember the guy who hijacked an Indian plane from Kathmandu to Kabul? He was a
Pakistani terrorist who got a heros welcome in Pakistan.
India's most wanted gangster Dawood Ibrahim, has been given permanent refuge in
Pakistan. Your govt denied it... but guess what your magazines had published photos of his
house at Karachi!
Bhaskar What about the Al Qaeda people who are being given refuge in Pakistan. Are the Al Qaeda
not terrorists? Do you know that there are very many Al Qaeda Pakistani supporters in
Orkut itself.

Your country and educational system that you have no idea about India.
Do you know how many Pakistanis come to India regularly for specialised medical
treatment.

So Abdul, stick to the topic and if you have basis to argue, refute point by point with fact.
Don't make statements that Pakistan doesn't support terrorism, which even you don't
believe.

Do you think, India has no better work than cook up propaganda?
Incidentally we go to our temples to pray. Temple priests dont deliver lectures.

Wake up Abdul. Wake up.

Cheers!
Yes.. 2/7/2005 9:30 AM
Yes 5 ppl were killed when they were thrown out of a train by certain jawans and they were
run over by a train coming in the opposite direction. The 3 army + 1 BSF jawan have been
arrested by the police and are in custody pending a trial. So whats ur point? These men did
something wrong and are being taken to task for that.
Abanith
Gujarat : The BJP Govt in Gujarat was re-elected on the basis of a very successful policy

8.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

of commmunal division.However, it didnt pass muster with the rest of india and the same
BJP is thrown out now and still dunno what hit them. Cases are being reopened.The
Supreme court of India has ordered a reopening of nearly 3000 riot cases. The last has yet
to be heard on the Godhra incident, though there definitely is a case for shoddy
maintenance of the crime scene with intent to hide the truth. Well i only hope that when the
godhra report is finally ratified by the courts, the last excuse the BJP had for Gujarat,wud
also be shattered. And it wud force them to rethink their political strategy.

In all this mess, there is the shameful Best Bakery Case u shud be aware of Mr.Syed
[since u seem to be well versed in india affars], on which i rather not comment.
2/8/2005 5:35 AM
If millitary rules pakistan whats the big thing about it.in many african and latin american
country thetre is millitary governments too.After all its PAKISTAN ARMY which rules
pakistan not Indian or army countries army and its also an internal affair of pakistan

If the people of Kashmir had wanted to be wwith india there would had been no insurgency
in indian occupied Kashmir instead there would been an insurgency in pakistani part of
Rana
kashmir but nothing happened like this. it is fact that no gun or any weapons has been
raised against pakistani control....do you have any answere!!!
2/8/2005 7:58 AM
How do you know?

When you live under the military you don't live under a democracy and there is no
democratic freedom.

Besides military rulers do not have respect in the eyes of the world as they do not
represent the democratic wishes of the people.

Bhaskar
If you want to compare yourself with military ruled countries in Africa, I can understand your
pathetic state of affairs!

Cheers!
2/8/2005 12:14 PM
Since nation system came into existance... The issue of whose land is whose is there... As
far as Indian and Pakistani issue over Kashmir is concerned, it is there but it doesn't mean
we should have to fight over it... I think they both have to get soft on the issue doesn't need
to make it a core of tenshion between them...

Sikander
2/8/2005 6:26 PM
Existence of armed forces in the civilian setup is wrong. I agree there job is to protect the
borders. Why there is huge army in Kashmir?

Syed
2/8/2005 6:35 PM
well the army is there coz the militants were there.The troop numbers in Kashmir were not
the same before 1990. As the militancy goes down the troop nos go down too...They've
already started phased de-induction of the army
Abanith
Problems 2/8/2005 11:00 PM
I would like to raise the question to all those who say that pakistan is a terrorist and
siupports it. People who are defending India here seem to have forgotten how people are
treated in Kashmir. Females lose thier dignity due to the shamful doings of the Indian army.
And People are killed without reason. And its but natural that people who don't know much
think we are pathetic and wirte it and say cheers! Well they should take a good look at what
India is doing in Kashmir and what terror it generates there. It only knows how to look at
Pakistan and say that its under army rule and doesn't know democracy. But what about
India? why is it killing so many innocent people and playing with their dignity, is this what
Subhan demcracy is?!!! If so we are better off even with a n army rule.
I just don't understand the bad mentality of people who just go on saying that its Pakistan's
falt in everthing. India should look at itself andf what it does. And calling others pathetic

8.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

because they are against ur idea shows the maturity the oth party has. Because its a very
immature to call someone pathetic.
Anyway I would say again that the people of Kashmir should be given a rigth to free
speech withn they aren't by India and its army!!!! If India believes in true democracy then it
should prove it by letting Kashmiris decide for temselves what they want. And this isn't
acceptable to India and it says we don't know democracy they shouls look at their own acts
before saying anything about Pakistan.
I would go on further to say that its not worth fighting each other as we were at one time
one country and we were a good power. But since we became two countries we started
fighting. Why not try and get ourselves together and become one as this would sole alot of
issues.
Simply ridiculous! 2/9/2005 1:55 AM
Do you hear any Indian telling you
that you should stop this stupid business of killing women in Pakistan through honor
killings?

Do we tell you how you should be running Sind or Baluchistan?

Do we tell you that you should not call yourself an Islmic Republic?

Do we tell you that you should not support the Taliban?

Do we tell you that the Sunnis shouldn't be killing the Shias?

Do we lecture you on how you handle political dissent and the handling of opposition
leaders?
Bhaskar
Do we tell you that it is futile for you to bring India into each and every discussion about
Pakistan?

Do we tell you how pathetic you sound, when you whine about India and ruin your own
name...and when you call all this a result of Indian propaganda?

So don't even try telling India, what it should do for its states that are a part of it... and that
includes Kashmir!

Cheers!

purveyors of truth? 2/9/2005 4:33 AM
well since the pakistani friends...seem to know so much about kashmir i ask them how
many of them have been to the indian side of kashmir? Well if u get ur info from the media
then how many of the Pakistani media report from kashmir?

Sure there are a lot of things that go on in KAshmir that are not justified and should
change...did u know that there are elections goin on in Kashmir right now as we debate?Did
u read that in ur papers?
Abanith
Where they elect Kashmiris...ppl who have been thru the same conditions as them in the
last 15 yrs, not NRK's [Non Resident Kashmiris] who claim to know all about the Kashmiri
problems.
2/9/2005 5:57 AM
i have been to the pakistani side of kashmir and i have been to india too.so i atleast know
something .

Many people in pakistan even some in the ruling pary think that RAW is behind the so said
Insurgency in Bolachistan.The Bolachistan Chief Minsister indicated that there was an
external hand in the terrorist attacks.
so think before u speak. there is no problem in Sindh
Rana
instead do we have to tell you how to handle assam rebelion or Maoist Insurgency in
southren india

8.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

2/9/2005 7:44 AM
@Abanith

You call them militants and we think they are freedom fighters. Let the UN forces take
control of the land find out where the militants come from. I have heard your fist PM Jawahir
Lal Nehru promising Kashmiri people that there will be plebiscite.

@ Bhasker

Has any body ever told you what to do?

In Sikkim
In Manawader
In Junagarh
Syed In hydrabad Caccan of Nzam
In Mizuram
In Naga land
In Mysore state of Tipu

These entire places have been the victim of India’s greed for Land. Kashmir is different and
could belong to Pakistan. Let the people decide and let them decide. Come out of the
complex of being a great nation and try to understand your actual size
2/9/2005 8:27 AM
@ Mr.Syed
oh yes sir, but the plebiscite was supposed to be for the whole of kashmir..."Azad Kashmir"
and other part of Kashmir with pak and not to forget aksai chin...Try convincing the chinese
to give back the land Pak govt 'gifted' them so that u can hold elections there!! i know aksai
Abanith chin might have a sparse population but try asking the Chinese to do that!
Insurgents in S India 2/9/2005 8:50 AM
Insurgents in South india dont ask for Freedom or Seccession.The motivations and the
reasons such conflict are different. The Govt of India has no problems with their demands
as they are only asking for what the constitution has promised the people.Its the manner in
which they go about executing their demands that is the problem.They've taken the violent
route and the govt doesnt want that and hence the problem.

In fact i wudnt be surprised if the Baloch problem gets diplomatic and moral support from
India. What goes around comes around.

Abanith But if the people there dont think there is a problem, then no matter what the provocation
nobody can provoke a situation...

See India admittedly screwed up in handling development in Kashmir thus u see the
problem...but as Mr.Syed pointed out to the Nizam's Hyd, Tipu's Mysore, Junagadh etc etc
hardly a soul who wudnt want to be part of india though in the case of Hyd and Junagadh
their accession to india wasnt in very dissimilar circumstance to Kashmir.
2/9/2005 10:01 AM
The problem with India is that they try and change the topic from Kashmir to somewhere
else. They are ready to talk on cultural exchange programs.

Just take the example of this forum, what is the last post made discussing???
Baloch problem??

They know if they disciuss the Kashmir problem they r wrong. Then they come up with so
called facts accusing Pakistan.

If we deny those facts they say" These are real facts"
Mustafa These r the ones coppied from some Indian website.

Tell us those facts which r from neutral sources!

Come on and stop making false accusations on Pakistan and discuss this topic from a
"NEUTRAL" prospective.
scroll up the page mate! 2/9/2005 10:55 AM
read rana's post!
and rana and mr.syed had raised some issues about baloch and some indian problems

8.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

which i replied to.
Abanith And whats wrong with talkin about facts? You've not disputed any have u? First u ask to
talk about kashmir and when we talk then u say stop talkin about some facts posted on an
indian website!!

Start countering them...because its only when u make us realise look u indians got ur facts
wrong wud u even get the rational ppl to admit that we're dealin it wrong.The same wud
apply vice versa.

And if u were referring to my posts please refer to areas where i wudve made wrong posts
against Pak and i wud love to correct them if im wrong.

Emotions are good but they sometimes cloud the situation. Ok i take up ur offer to a neutral
debate!
Listen Pakis 2/9/2005 11:37 AM
Can any one of you prove that the FACTS on Kashmir that I put up is from a website?

ANYBODY?

This is a typical way in which you guys make statements without any basis or support.

I HAVE PUT UP THESE FACTS ON KASHMIR, IN FOUR FORUMS WHERE PAKISTANIS
are present and not a single POINT has been refuted.
Bhaskar
The topic of this thread is the Kashmir Dispute, and all that you guys can manage after all
these days is that my list is copied from a website.How pathetic!

Don't discuss your emotions here, discuss FACTS!
Talkin about facts 2/9/2005 9:20 PM
here's the copy of resolution UNSC 47 that talks about Kashmir...
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/047/72/IMG/NR004772.pdf?OpenEl
ement

its for PAk to move out first from what is now Azad Kashmir,then troop reduction in india
[reduction not withdrawal] then setting up of a Plebscite Administrator under UN auspices
but the local govt wud still be run at the ministerial level by people of Kashmir represented
Abanith through various political parties.

anyway all that happens ONLY (refer 2(a))
after the withdrawal from the pakistani side.
Bhaskar 2/9/2005 9:23 PM
Why r u getting emotional now?!!!
I don't want to waste my time explaining something to a person who isn't fit to listen to
justice!!!!!
Anyway KASHMIR isn't a part of India MIND IT!!! Its a disputed area. And who are u to tell
us what to say or not to say about India when u say bad things about Pakistan and what
goes on there. u should personally see what u write before u send some other wierd story.
And writing " Listen Pakis" Well for that I can say that u should "Listen Indis". by the way
why does it hurt if we say anythiong about the wrong doings of India as u very casually
write negative things about Pakistan. Does it hurt to hear the truth.
FURTHERMORE KASHMIR ISN'T India's PROERTY ITS A DISPUTED TERRITORY SO
DON"T TELL ME THAT I SHOULD NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT WHAT INDIA DOES
Subhan
THERE!!! If U can wrong things about our country well ur country does wrong too SO
WATCH IT. U HAVE NO RIGHT CALLING KASHMIR INDIA'S LAND. ITS NIETHER
PAKISTAN'S NOR INDIA'S UNTILL THE PEOPLE THERE DECIDE WHO THEY WANT
TO BE WITH!!!!
CHEERS!!!!

2/10/2005 12:31 AM
How funny! I have no right to call Kashmir as part of India?

Well I have every right and so does every Indian, because of the INSTRUMENT OF
ACCESSION.
Bhaskar
Do you know what it is?

8.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Have you ever read it?

Do you want to see an on-line copy?
Don't be ashamed to dispaly your ignorance if you haven't heard of it.

Each of you seem to have an irresistable urge to respond in some manner to every point
made against you.

The hallmark of good debate is to stick to the topic and dispute facts presented.

But then I understand and so does the world that you guys are tongue tied on the issue and
so is your country which therefore responds with terrorist activity!

This is something that the world has slowly begun to understand...high time!

Cheers!
Bhaskar 2/10/2005 2:36 AM
u are so funny. U say things about us but u have a tied tougue on urself that doesn't let u
think and act maturely. U should have a good look at urself.
And for ur kind information India is also know for its tereorist acts and is also known as a
terrorist. U should do ur homework boy, u need it badly. As ur comments now seem more
forthe sake of immaturity and irrationality. Be rational before u post the next comment.

I know much more then u can think and always want to share it when i find a good
argument to present it in. U on the other hand know how to really have ur tongue tied bad
which explains ur reactions. Wake up kid and act mature!

As far as what i said I stand by it. And if anyone really wants to think of a way out instead of
exchanging arguments then i beleieve weshould let the people of kahmir decide what they
Subhan want.
this issue needs to be discussed with someone with a neutral mind be that of any country.
One shouldn't be selfish about the issue as its a delecate one due to which we have almost
waged a big time war and if not halted and this issue solved both countries might end up
with a neuclear war thich the whole world fears. And India is itself recgnised as a big
terrorist state by the world and there is no denying it.
Cheers!
@ Abdul 2/10/2005 3:07 AM
Each of you seem to have an irresistable urge to respond in some manner to every point
made against you.

The hallmark of good debate is to stick to the topic and dispute facts presented.

This is what I have said in my previous post. Did you read it?
Have you yet answered any of the FACTS on Kashmir that I had put up?
Bhaskar
Speaks a lot about your attitude to stick to a position without any basis, doesn't it?

Take up the challenge. Refute point by point. And tell me how old you are kid!

Cheers!
@ Abdul and Bhaskar 2/10/2005 4:05 AM
Guys lets not make it personal and keep it objective.
Just look up the UN link ive put up on the Kashmir resolution and we'll take it from there.

Abanith
@ Abdul 2/10/2005 4:07 AM
At which international Forum or fora had india been branded a terrorist state? Can u plz
post the link?

Abanith

8.20
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

2/10/2005 5:17 AM
which international law states or gives india any right to claim Kashmir as a part of india.it is
a disputed territory

When junagarh acceded to pakistan i termed as illegal as majority was non muslim and
invaded and occupeied the state.so was with hayerabad because nizam was muslim and
wanted to join pakistan or remain independent. he left millions of rupees in his bank
accounts for pakistan .india also occupied that state.
The Maharajah had joind a standstill agreement with pakistan but he took actions to turn
Rana muslim majority into minority and this started freedom struggle and led to indian
invasion.And then a bogus document was signed by Maharajah.it was bouous as it was
signed after indian invasion but dated to the day before invasion . and india accepted this
,why this one?????
ILLEGAL!!! 2/10/2005 9:48 AM
@ Rana

which international law states or gives india any right to claim Kashmir as a part of india

Have you heard of a legal document called an agreement.
An agreement is an arrangement between 2 entities, in this case 2 sovereign countries.

The Instrument of Accession signed by the Maharaja of Kashmir and Lord Mountbatten, is
a legal document recognised in all courts including international courts.

Pakistan's act of occupation is therefore illegal.

ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
Bhaskar ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!
ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL! ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!
@ Bhaskar 2/10/2005 10:40 AM
Dude tanda kar yaar!

Abanith
2/10/2005 7:54 PM
Legally it is the last instrument which stands and overrides all the previous ones. The last
resolution of the UN is the only legal document and all the agreements declarations
between our leaders are the guiding path for the solution of the core issue between India
and Pakistan. Kashmir is an issue yet to be solved is agreed by all the relevant parties and
the international community.
Syed

8.21
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

2/10/2005 8:16 PM
Mr. Hugo Luís Pena Ferreira

I see a lot of scraps for you; you must be a very popular person. You have quit writing on
Kashmir issue. Please do post your valuable comments and encourage others also. It is an
international community and every one has the right to have his opinion. I apologize for the
offences from some of the people on community Kashmir Issue.
Syed

2/11/2005 1:22 AM
Legally it is the last instrument which stands and overrides all the previous ones.
=======================================

An agreement between two parties is sacrosanct and binding legally as long as the SAID
TWO PARTIES enter into a fresh new agreement which explicitly says that the previous
agreement is now no loner valid.

The 2 parties involved were Kashmir and India, in the Instrument of Accession.
No third party can call this legal document illegal.

If an agreement has been signed between the UN and India, then such an agreement is
valid only between the UN and India legally and cannot invalidate an agreement that India
Bhaskar has entered into with Kashmir.

Before shooting off the hip, please go check up with your neighbourhood lawyer, who
knows a bit of law in your part of the world.

You guys behave like whining spoilt brats.
Running all over the place seeking help from all and sundry, to lend support to your
illogical reasoning soaked in lies and untruth.

So Pakistan's occupation of Kashmir is ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!ILLEGAL!
2/11/2005 4:46 AM
i wonder how many of us have actually read Resolution 47 viz a viz the Indo-Pak and
KAshmir.
Abanith
2/11/2005 6:06 AM
if the whole of international community recognizes kashmir as a disputed territory who the
hell the indians are to call it as part of their country.

Accept Chenab Formula. it will be good for both people of indo-pak
Rana
2/11/2005 6:31 AM
The international community is just being polite...now that the ILLEGAL occupation by
Pakistan has gone on for such a long time.

Its a remnant of the cold-war era diplomatic language, and also because the handful of
countries ( which u club as the international community) had a vested interest in the region
given the instabilities in Iran and Afghanistan.

By calling Kashmir as part of India, they also do not want to drive Pakistan further into
depression and terrorism.
Bhaskar
Don't worry, the LAW always takes its course!

The entire world will say the TRUTH, that
Pakistan's occupation is ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!

Cheers!
FACTS ABOUT KASHMIR 2/11/2005 7:01 AM
Location

The State of Jammu and Kashmir is bordered in north by China, east by autonomous
region of Tibet, south by Indian states of Himachal Pradesh and Punjab, and west by
Pakistan. 63 per cent of the territory is under Indian occupation; while the rest, 37 per cent,

8.22
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Rana is with Pakistan, called Azad (independent) Jammu and Kashmir (AJK).

Area

151,360 square kilometers

Indian-occupied Kashmir: 95,356 sq.kms

Azad Jammu and Kashmir : 56,003 sq.kms

Population

13 million (approximate)

Indian-occupied Kashmir: 7.7 million (projected figures, as census has not been held since
1991) Azad Jammu Kashmir: 2.58 million (1990 figure) Refugees in Pakistan: 1.5 million
Expatriates: 1.5 million
2/11/2005 7:02 AM
World’s oldest dispute

The Kashmir dispute is the oldest unresolved international conflict in the world today.
Pakistan considers Kashmir as its core political dispute with India. So does the
international community, except India. While Indian security forces are practicing an
unprecedented reign of terror in Occupied Kashmir being widely reported world-wide; the
Indian government, currently led by Hindu nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party, is neither
willing to negotiate the issue multilaterally—through international mediation—nor is it ready
to sort it out with Pakistan through bilateral negotiations. India and Pakistan have already
fought two wars over Kashmir. The exchange of fire between their forces across the Line
of Control, which separates Azad Kashmir from Occupied Kashmir, is a routine affair. Now
Rana that both India and Pakistan have acquired nuclear weapons potential, the possibility of a
third war between them over Kashmir, which may involve the use of nuclear weapons,
cannot be ruled out. The likely nuclear disaster in South Asia, whose cause may be
Kashmir, can be averted with an intervention by the international community. Such an
intervention is urgently required to put an end to Indian atrocities in Occupied Kashmir and
prepare the ground for the implementation of UN resolutions, which call for the holding of a
plebiscite to determine the wishes of the Kashmiri people
2/11/2005 7:06 AM
Cause of the Kashmir dispute

India’s forcible occupation of the State of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947 is the main cause
of the dispute. India claims to have ‘signed’ a controversial document, the Instrument of
Accession, on 26 October 1947 with the Maharaja of Kashmir, in which the Maharaja
obtained India’s military help against popular insurgency. The people of Kashmir and
Pakistan do not accept the Indian claim. There are doubts about the very existence of the
Instrument of Accesion. The United Nations also does not consider Indian claim as legally
valid: it recognises Kashmir as a disputed territory. Except India, the entire world
Rana community recognises Kashmir as a disputed territory. The fact is that all the principles on
the basis of which the Indian subcontinent was partitioned by the British in 1947 justify
Kashmir becoming a part of Pakistan: the State had majority Muslim population, and it not
only enjoyed geographical proximity with Pakistan but also had essential economic
linkages with the territories constituting Pakistan.
2/11/2005 7:16 AM
You guys have NO MORAL RIGHT to talk about Kashmir after having gifted a part of it to
China.

Bhaskar Can you imagine a country gifting land to another... land that is ILLEGALLY OCCUPIED in
the first place!
2/11/2005 7:31 AM
@Rana

Is this the best you can do?
Copy something from a website without even attaching the source links?
Bhaskar
Nevermind, I had a hearty laugh when you guys claim that the Instrument of Accession is
fictional.

8.23
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

I even asked you guys whether you guys wanted to see a copy of it... but no!

How can a Pakistani publicly acknowledge that he does not believe in LAW... !

Just like whining that the international community ( in hushed tones ) call Pakistan a
terrorist state...and loudly claiming that it doesn't support terrorism, when in fact it does!

Bah!
2/11/2005 8:00 AM
@dear friends across the border

if we dont act accordingly to the wish of a superpower then what will become of
us...........Afghnistan,Iraq and so on.......

In reality it is America who decides the fate of Kashmir, not India & Pakistan.
Mayukh
..the words of someone from from pakistan....
the ppl who do not have the guts to stand for their sovereignity talk of liberating others......

2/11/2005 8:22 AM
if China has the so called Kashmiri land than why does india snatch it from china...ha ha
ha. you people have bitter experiences of indo-china war of 1962.

So in the past 60 years indian government has done nothing to solve this issue than to
allege pakistan of supporting the border infiltration instead pakistan has showed a lot of
flexibility
Rana
i m again saying accept Chenab formula. it will be a diplomatic victory for both pakistan
and india. it will be the victory of people of india and pakistan
2/11/2005 8:49 AM
@ Rana

Are you saying that Pakistan did not grant sizeable Kashmir land to China?

Hint: This requires only a simple YES/NO answer...so don't ramble!
Bhaskar
And don't chicken out... answer the question!
@ Rana 2/11/2005 9:00 AM
see it is only since u prefer to live in ur convoluted world that u shall not see reason. Go
read the UNSC res 47.

U realistically think the intl community gives a damn about what anybody's human rights or
the right and the wrong? They sat by watching as one million ppl were massacred in
Rwanda...and will sit by watching as the US play their game in Iraq.

60 yrs have passed and what has the intl community done? NOTHING. No oil in kashmir
mate and thats all that counts to them. So whether we cry foul or u cry foul no one wud stir.

If there is a solution to be found for kashmir its only to be found within the subcontinent. If u
Abanith think India wud allow KAshmir to become part of PAkistan...forget it. The best u can hope
for is total Autonomy for Kashmir in all matter except Defence and Foreign Affairs. No other
solution wud be acceptable here.

And as things stand today u can cry hoarse about, go to war on it, or continue the proxy
war and nothing wud change. you will just end up making lives miserable for the kashmiris.
The day is not far off when things return to normal in kashmir. IT happened in Tamil Nadu,
happened in Punjab, Tripura...now Kashmir.
2/11/2005 2:31 PM
How many protest rallies and strikes are observed in the Indian occupied Kashmir and how
many strikes there have been in the Azad Kashmir (independent Kashmir)? No body can
enslave people for ever let India put all of its army in occupied Kashmir. Let us all ask our
respective governments to take the matter to international court. None of us involved in the
Syed discussion is a qualified lawyer even if one is there he is prejudiced.

8.24
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

2/11/2005 9:12 PM
You screech like a broken record.
Haven't you still UNDERSTOOD that it is Pakistan that is ILLEGALLY occupying Kashmir?

May be you find the CONCEPT OF LAW highly confusing. I have found this to be true
when it comes to Pakistanis.
But then I understand the limitations of your society. Not being exposed to democracy or a
democratic society, you do not understand law nor respect it.
As a result your sense of JUSTICE and SANCTITY of TRUTH is also warped!

Anyway, I'll make it simple for you.
You want to solve the Kashmir problem?
Withdraw from all of Kashmir occupied by Pakistan.
Pay your dues to China in some other form and handover that part of Kashmir which you
gifted to them unauthorizedly.

If you do this, the problem is solved immediately.
Here's a chance for Pakistan to start behaving like a civilised global citizen.

Don't worry about the people staying in Kashmir. Without your benevolent attention on
them, the Kashmiris will immediately find peace and harmony in India and understand its
Bhaskar place in it.

This will cut your needless army expenditure. You will save money to spend money on
your poor uneducated citizens. Today, you spend more than $3billion dollars on
defense...much of this as aid from the US and Saudi Arabia.
At least you'll learn to be more self-dependent and dance to the tune of China, USA and
Saudi. This will also improve your national self-esteem.

Go tell your President and your govt this.
More importantly educate your youth being taught in your various madarassas.

Go around Orkut, to understand how close minded the so called educated people of
Pakistan, represented in Orkut,really are. That should be a reality check for you. Are you
capable of reflection, and dispassionate introspection?

I don't think so. Most definitely not. However if you are, that is your salvation.

Cheers!
2/12/2005 5:40 AM
The problem can be solved peacefuly if a union of the joining area can be made, although
SAARC is there but that has to be taken into this and new member states have to be
added this will form some thing like the European Union which is only a new kind of union
as it was formed after the WWII and that also had the same problem that France and
Germany had fought Wars between them. This kind of Union will have a very positive
Yahya approach as it will have the power to make all the member states comply to its objectives.
Adeel
@ Yahya 2/12/2005 8:07 AM
Long way to go for that mate...we have too many of our problems to solve before
that....and too many ppl on both sides of the border have flogged the indo pak disputes to
make a successful career for them to give up now.

yes germany and france had their problems but it took 2 world wars and a cold war to get
Abanith the EU going...by that precedent i shudder to think what its gonna take for our ppl to
understand ur wisdom!
2/15/2005 5:16 AM
Well we are fighting no proxy war. if we had done so and invaded Kashmir india would had
been wiped off the world map. As we are showing flexibility it shows that we want peace

Rana
@ Rana 2/15/2005 8:24 AM
just find out what proxy war means
then we'll see if its gonna wipe india of the world map

8.25
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Abanith
2/15/2005 9:10 AM
@ Bhasker 2/11/2005 1:22 AM

Tell me which document bears the older date and the signature of Indian representative,
the one between the muharaja and the indian government or the one between the UN and
the indian government? Rest assured that the older on is a junk in the history.

India falsely accuses Pakistan of cross border terrorism. Let there be forces from the
United Nation comprising forces gathered form neutral countries to take control of the
disputed land and find out the truth.

Pakistanis are not afraid to face the truth, but it seems looking at your behavior the indian
people are! You may repeat ILLEGAL a thousand times.

“But then I understand the limitations of your society. Not being exposed to democracy or a
Syed democratic society, you do not understand law nor respect it.”

I was in india in 1979 I asked a political science student and a political worker why the
indians threw out Indira. The answer was that she was corrupt. When told them that the
Allahabad High Court judgment and aftermath was a CIA plot he could not understand and
started arguing as you are doing it now. I checked with him to see what he read as a
political science student. There was no mention of the Communist Party manifesto while
discussing socialism. And the whole chapter comprised of sole two pages. Have pity on a
politically aware nation, and the so-called Congress party known to have socialist liberal
inclinations. After the independence, like ours your poor are too struggling for the basic
necessities. Let us keep on fighting for Kashmir

@ Mr.Syed 2/15/2005 11:00 AM
1979...25 years is a real long time! The poverty might still be there but political realities
have changed. The Congress is no longer what it is...neither is socialism what it used to
be. My father is a communist and i asked him what was the manifesto he read...it was
much much more than 2 sheet of paper...so lets not get carried away by the judgements
made that long ago.

Since u stick by the UN just read the resoulution 47...and then lets talk. para by para.

Abanith Even that resolution became worthless when Aksai Chin was gifted off...now any solution
by that UN resolution wud involve China too.

Well first it is suggested that we go by the UN resolution then when we read it and say hey
what ur doin is also illegal...then u say stop using the word illegal!!
copy of the resolution 2/18/2005 8:03 AM
Resolution adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January 1957,
concerning the India–Pakistan Question
The resolution is a reaffirmation of the Security Council resolution of 30 March 1951 that
the convening of a Constituent Assembly and any action taken by it would not constitute
disposition of the State in accordance with the will of the people of Kashmir expressed
through the democratic method of a free and impartial plebiscite conducted under the
auspices of the United Nations. It was introduced by Australia, Colombia, Cuba, the United
Kingdom and the U.S.A., and supported by 10 members of the Council, the Soviet Union
abstaining.
The Security Council,
Having heard statements from representatives of the Governments of India and Pakistan
concerning the dispute over the State of Jammu and Kashmir,
Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
Syed resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and impartial
plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,
1. Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All

8.26
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have taken
or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or
any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such action by the
Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above
principles;
2. Decides to continue its consideration of the dispute.
2/18/2005 10:57 PM
Above is the copy of the resolution adapted by the Security Counsel of the United Nations
Organization. This was in response of the situation when All Jammu and Kashmir National
Conference decide to make occupied Kashmir a part of Indian Union. To me this is the
valid official instrument for the settlement of the dispute? There after there have been
mutual declarations, communiqués, agreements etc. to me later ones don’t carry that much
weight as that of the UN resolutions. Please guide me if I am wrong.

Visit of your Foreign Minister has, I think, made good progress towards the normalization
of the relations between the two countries. People of this region too deserve a better life.
Syed Fighting and stubbornness will not solve any problem.

I get little time to do this activity of writing posts, if I get time in future I will the discuss in a
positive manner the basic cause of the bitterness that is the psyche of the Indian people.

8.27
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Community Pakistan.
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=5167&tid=2425074964966783209&start=91&na=1&nid=

Topic: Musharraf refused offer of Indian Helicopters..!

Musharraf refused offer of Indian Helicopters..! 10/14/2005 4:18 AM
Its one of the hot topic on international media that our President refused offer of
Helicopters from Indian Govt. People coming from different school of thoughts are
criticising this decision of President Musharraf.
Sughis I think Mr. President took sensible decision in worst conditions to make sure that our most
sensitive utilities will not be absolutely exposed to our decades old rival, India....!
10/14/2005 6:22 AM
yeah i agree this would be the most sensible thing done by him... for the last 6 yrs now.

Rabia
10/14/2005 6:31 AM
yes me too agree with this to show indians that we are not dependent on them

SERIAL
10/14/2005 6:46 AM
Would you say the same thing, if you and your family had been affected by the earthquake
with all your possessions lost?
Bhaskar
10/14/2005 7:02 AM
ASALAMOALEKUM.....c ....takin help from india wud have definatly been a risk to pakistan
but at this time when v r in such a crisses and the first and the foremost priority shud b to
like save as many many as they can....refusing the help from this point ov weiw wudnt
Waqas have been a gud desicion......and as one ov u above said ...it definatly wudnt have been
the same desicion if ALLAH NA KAREY it was our families under thoses masses.......
10/14/2005 7:07 AM
any country which has been ur enemy for a long time does not offer to help u only for the
sake of help....

we here should not forget that these peopel kill muslims everyday in indian occupied
kashmir... do u even expect them to come here only for the sake of help... they had alot to
gain if they had been given the chance...
Rabia
people are dying and i of all people feel really bad that many of them could not be
helped.... but a country's head has to look at the countrys welbeing in the long run..
10/14/2005 7:52 AM
Indeed...I do understand the feelings of people who r affected by the quake one way or
the other. But, such problems r not meant to deal with emotions, rather they need more
diplomatic decisions. What do u think, it would be a wise decision to permit indian troops
for help and put the lives of 150 million population on risk. Coz once they get our secrets
Sughis they can target them pretty easily in case of tension in a while...!
I do feel for the affected people as they were and are from my family.
10/14/2005 8:14 AM
Must say a very sensible decision
Gul
@ bhaskar 10/14/2005 9:36 AM
Dont you remember that when Indian land was trembled back in 99, Indian govt. also
refused to take Pakistani Choppers for helping those ceased under the rubble...????

Ajnabi

9.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/14/2005 10:18 AM
I don't understand what you are referring to...India never required choppers from any
country nor did it ask ANY country for choppers, for any recent calamity.
Bhaskar

10/14/2005 11:13 AM
well a very wise and sensible decision.

Salman
10/14/2005 11:39 AM
Well in Tsunami disaster, Pakistan also offered aid to India, which they did not accepted.
At least we accepted the material aid from them.
Sughis
Indians are our enemy 10/14/2005 12:11 PM
HI PREISDENT MUSHARRAF TOOK A RIGHT DECISION BY REFUSING OFFER OF
INDIAN HELICOPTERS BECAUSE THEY MIGHT STEEL OUR MILITARY TACTICS AND
WILL LEAVE THEIR SPIES.THEY ARE REALLY ASSHOLES WE SHOULD NEVER
Monaim TRUST THEM.
10/14/2005 1:08 PM
You people only favour the decision just because of the rivalery between india and
pakistan.

For a few moments just realize the fact...

look at these news (published by daily The News)

14 oct. 2005

US to add more choppers for increased relief operations
Updated at 1805 PST)
WASHINGTON: The U.S. military is increasing its helicopter aid to Pakistan for more quick
relief and rescue effort, US military disaster assistance center’s commander Michael
Lefever said in a press briefing.

U.S. aircraft and troops will assist in relief efforts in Pakistan as long as they are wanted,
the commander of the U.S. military's disaster assistance center said Friday.
Ajnabi
The U.S. military has deployed 13 helicopters, including eight Chinooks, three Blackhawks
and two heavy-lifting MH-53s, to ferry rescue workers and supplies to the quake zone.

if it was only the matter of exposure of sensitive places to india, then Musharaf must
consider the Americans about flying over our land.

besides, in the daily Jang of 11th Oct. UN official said that Pakistan need 40 to 50 more
choppers for the rescue operations to be carried out. due to lack of air transport most of
the areas are unreachable at the moment. and also the rescue operation is still not
satisfactory.

what do u say about that...??
10/14/2005 2:05 PM
To the matter of fact, if u remember Afghan war set by US, Pakistan was one of the main
country to provide its land and logistic support to them. So, indirectly US military is already
in the country since that time. But in case of India its different, u should consider the
diplomatic strategy they adopted on this sensitive situation in a sense that they r offering
their transport to save lives from Kashmir and area around. On the other hand what about
those precious lives being slaughtered by Indian Army in Kashmir since decades n
Sughis decades? What about those innocent young women being raped by Indian Army? What
about those miserable people whose houses, shops etc were destroyed/burnt by Indians?

Its all about diplomacy, be realistic.....!

9.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/14/2005 2:44 PM
i think the president made the right decision by accepting the material relief offered by
india as at that time and even now v need it to ensure the survival of the surviors of the
earthqauke. However, i also think he made the right decision by not acceptin choppers
from india because that v r managing quite well and with more u.s and japanese help
comin in v prob wont need so many choppers. As for the U.N sayin v need 40 to 50 more
Blooming choppers the U.N also said we need billions of dollors to rebuild and rehabiliate the
survivors. I dont want pak to b in Indias debt by takin any money from then and im sure
even the survivors would not want that for their country.
10/14/2005 2:51 PM
in a side news indian pm also refused pakistan's help of choppers. also help from israel
was also refused due to similar reasons
u have to take a look at the bigger picture here, Pakistani govt cant be seen accepting
Arsalan money or aid from their biggest rivals. it'll sure look like a sign of weakness. and we dont
want to be in debt of our biggest rival in anyway
10/14/2005 9:25 PM
I dont want pak to b in Indias debt by takin any money from then and im sure even the
survivors would not want that for their country.

Pakistan is getting 85 tons of essential equipment from India including 12 tons of medical
supplies, so deal with it.

Nearly a 100 children are brought over to India by Pakistani parents EVERY YEAR for
treatment of highly specialised heart ailments, ailments which would have otherwise killed
Bhaskar their children.

Even at the height of political tension created by Pakistan at the time of Kargil, India did
not stop these parents coming into the country via Dubai.

I'm sure you are the type to tell those parents that they should allow their children to die,
rather than treat them in India.
10/14/2005 9:27 PM
Well in Tsunami disaster, Pakistan also offered aid to India, which they did not accepted.

India did not accept AID from any country and we did not ask any country for help or aid or
Bhaskar assistance. In fact we provided AID to Sri Lanka, Maldives and Indonesia.
10/14/2005 9:29 PM
Indians are our enemy

Yes that is what the Pakis have been saying since 1947. The hate mongering in Pakistan
Bhaskar is there for everybody in the world to see.

well said.. 10/14/2005 10:45 PM
And abt rape being done by indian army??
who says that..remember Mukhtar Mai!

Saumitra
Raj
10/15/2005 1:00 AM
i also think president has taken the right decision....

Usman
10/15/2005 1:01 AM
At the moment, I am abroad. Since, I came here I met many people from my neighbour
country. In the begining most of them avoid me coz I am from Pakistan. Once for a while v
were on a get together, and I had some snaps with them while shaking hand. U know what
those guys said...u cant guess, i am sure...they said if our friends will c these pics either
Sughis they will kill us or u..!
I think it is not b wise to say that Pakis r doing the same since 1947, coz people with

9.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

extreme ideas n approach r everywhere irrespective of country.

N about RAPE, my dear friend, thats the problem with media and those who exploit such
issues. I agree Mukhtara Mai is among one of the very few victims being raped worstly. But
on the other hand, its the HOBBY of Indian Army...lolz.
The letters pouring into Dawn 10/15/2005 1:17 AM
...say something else about the majority of Pakistani people.

... I suggest that our government should ask India to send troops with heavy machinery,
medicines and other relief goods to help the affected people where relief agencies have
not been able to go.
---
The Indian army should be allowed under the supervision of UN to carry out relief work in
Azad Jammu and Kashmir for a certain period of time. As soon as the situation gets under
control, it can be asked to leave.
---
A LOT of people have died because the roads leading to their villages were blocked. The
only way to reach them was by helicopter. The president should have put differences aside
Tarun and taken India's offer.
---
There is enough technology around if a country wants to spy on another. Maps of any
major city are available in shops or even on the Internet. Also, India has a quite adequate
remote sensing system. Keep the flag of Kashmir flying high but why prevent help to little
children trapped under the debris of their school buildings?

These above quoted are some of the responses from common people of Pakistan to the
DAWN.
we are in crisis 10/15/2005 1:31 AM
well buddy i suggest thats not a kool thinking of musharaf cuz at this tym we shold become
1 and neglect all the political a relegious issues and if we need the support we should get
them whtever they are indian american or any other , if we are intrested to take the aid
from the ill believers y we take the aid from america and isriel,
Waqas
10/15/2005 2:05 AM
i believe a very good decision .. to take the material aid ( food n medicine ) n not the
helicopterz..very wise decision..

@ indianz... i know india has a very huge population... but caant u indianz buzz off from
alleat this community..!!!

Zeeshan
10/15/2005 2:15 AM
very right decision by the president
indian army offered a combine operation in azad kashmir

hey do u guys thnk we are fool

and my solute to our defence minister
guys u know what he said
Saad we said thnk u we dun need men power we already have it but if india like we can do a
combine operation in indian occupied kashmir

and after that india never said abt combine operation
lambiiiiiii khamosshi hai
10/15/2005 2:54 AM
@Zeeshan
This is a public forum open to all. Please check the home page.

Aur ab whats the prob in Indian choppers? Waise bhi Musharaff ne to Pakistan ko bech hi
diya hai America ko. LOLZZZ...hehe

Rajiv

9.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@Rajiv 10/15/2005 3:05 AM
How?

Tarun
10/15/2005 3:34 AM
Many Pakistanis would agree on this. Ask them. Coz I have got this notion from them only.
LOL...

Rajiv

journey/@ Rajiv 10/15/2005 3:57 AM
We've enjoyed American Friendship a lot. Now it's your turn to have fun. Manmohan has
started it. Just look at the resolution about Iran, in which India went for US against Iran.
And it's just a begining. We have more than fifty years experience and I am sure you're
gonna enjoy that.

PEPSI/COKE for THUMBS UP

MERC/BMW for Maruti

McDonald, KFC, Pizza Hut, Dominos and the list goes on.

Hope both of us gonna enjoy US friendship status.

You can deny it for now, but it's not too far. As far as Pakistan is concerned, nothing to
Anaulhaq
worry about. As we're already in the band wagon. But my friend you'll also enjoy the
journey.

I've also started thinking how India will look like under the rule of Chief of the Army Staff
who will take the charge in "Supreme National Interest" of India by removing the corrupt
political govt.
These are the american gifts extended to its friends, and you will be no exception to that.

You can laugh out loud and forget this posting, but you may need to recall it in your mind
some day.
10/15/2005 4:00 AM
@pakistanis

u ppl can take aid from Israel but not from India. and what explanation can u give for
that?

and what military secrets is india going to steal in kashmir right now. there is not a single
house standing in kashmir and india is stupid to steal secrets from us.

Junaid Noor yeah they might take some snap shots of the buildings razed to the ground because the
ruins of muzafarabad are a precious military secret for them. lolz

@indians

india did reject the help of US in andaman nicobar islands because that is a sensitive
military and air force base of indian army.
10/15/2005 4:09 AM
@Anuhalag
What are you talking about? You've talked about gloalization mate and that aint going to
hurt India.

About Iran, it is not only in India's but Pak's interest also that they dont make nuclear
weapons. This incident hasn't really affected our otherwise friendly relations with them.
USA is also against the Iran-Pak-India pipeline. But we're going ahead with it. It was a

9.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Rajiv decision puerely for India's benefit. Gas from Iran & nuclear tech from US. What's wrong?

You seem to be stuck in the cold war era. McD, pizza hut, merc & BMWs are there in Pak
also. But whats not here in India? We dont chase our own people at somebody else's
behest.
10/15/2005 4:30 AM
Well guys....! its not about the secrets from Azad Kashmir region. If u have a bit of
information then u must know that most rather all the International flights with relief goods
and rescue teams r landing and taking off from Chaklala Air Base. In that context u
should also take into account that lot of air traffic is out there on the capital around which
our Nuclear utilities r installed and vice versa. Although spying is always going on, but in
such emergency situation the chances go much higher than normal conditions. So, one
has to take precautaionary measures for the long term state interest.

Sughis Its simply a good shot played by Indian PM....! A day before yesturday we also heard
from Indian side that some Indian troops helped Pakis to fix their Bunker but, on the other
hand it is denied by Paki officials.

Cum on, its seems really funny that Indian troops will help Pakistani Army to fix their
Bunkers....I dont have much to say except that nice shot after shot from Indians....
10/15/2005 4:32 AM
I think if the offer i still their then Musharraf should think over it one more time....

CHAO
Albayla
Rahi
10/15/2005 4:48 AM
@ bhaskar: i do know that pak has acepted aid from india and im thankful for it but i will
stick by my word sayin that pak should not accept monetary aid from india. and plz tell
me HOW does this relate with the pakistanis bringin their children to india for medical
atention!!!!! Stick to the topic.

@ tarun: no one is sayin that they should not take the material aid from india they should
coz thats what is needed the most right now. There r more helicopters comin so mayb the
no was said coz v have enough already.

@ rajiv: becareful abt wht u say. HOW DARE U SAY SUCH A THING!!!! Just bcoz v r
Blooming now in a positive image and r bein helped by various nations means v have sold our
country. Incase u didnt kno no one can sell the country coz there r ppl livin in it who will
protest. So b4 u say such a thing watch it. Oh & wht u guys hav no hatredtowards pak. ur
hatred is showd by comments like urs. Till now most of u say do dilon ke beech main
deewar aa gayi and stuff like that. so my suggestin to u is GET OVER IT!!!!

I have a general complain y cant the indians replyin say somethin positive, y does it
alway s have to b negative and insultin. Till now only tarun has been one person who
thinks from bot perspective and replies unlike the rest. Grow up guys!!!
help...? 10/15/2005 4:52 AM
Dear Friends,
I dont know and rather disbelieve in the previous tensions in the case of emergency.
I had seen an earthquake and its human dimension in the earthquake of 2001 in
Kachchh. I remember India had accepted the flight load of supplies from Pakistan. I had
seen the flight landing and the supplies. It was full of blankets, milk powder, fruits and
tents. I had really loved the gesture of both the politicians and deeply hounored by the
sentiments that were prevelant at that time.

People who are blindly commenting on the rejection are the people who stuck to the
computer and the TV channels for all the news and got induced by sentiments that loads
of people are dying with out help. I request you to just keep your foot down and look for
Archi the people who still can be survived if you have the sufficient man power and technicians
and technology. I rememebr poeple were saved after 18th day in the Kachchh
earthquake.
The decsion of the President Musharraf was indeed a lil surprise to me under the given
peace talks that were going on.

Dont get dragged into the false pride. We cannot afford to discuss and maintain the age
old enemity at the cost of the effected people.

9.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Infact, the western media is looking for such news in order to escalate the tensions and
get paid for that. Dont fall for that! Think as human being and be rational in your thinking.
@ Rajiv 10/15/2005 5:09 AM
I have already wrote;

"You can laugh out loud and forget this posting, but you may need to recall it in your mind
some day."

It always starts like this, Globalization or whatever.

Yeah, you people are balancing it yet with diplomatic smiles, but in US friendship there
comes a time when they say if you're our ally then declare it openly. Like "Either you're
Anaulhaq with us or you're against us".

And the potential of indian market as well as Chinese factor will urge US to get more and
more penetration into Indian System as well as Govt. affairs.

As I said its a far fetched idea and you can ignore it but it always starts like this.
@Archi 10/15/2005 5:48 AM
Without being in touch with media, it is not possible for anyone to remain update now and
then...!

Also I wud like to bring it in ur kind notice that Pakistan has already accepted the material
aid from India and we being the Pakistanis appreciate it whole heartedly.

Sughis About Helicopters...if Pak refused the offer it does not mean that it will affect the peace
process between two countries. U shud take into account that it is a peace process and
not everyday quarrel between two kids over a candy....lolz. It simply shows the sensitivity
of the offer and realistic decision taken by Musharraf.
10/15/2005 1:28 PM
it is better to die on ur feet than live on ur knees... take the meaning out of ot

$aad

10/15/2005 1:28 PM
it is better to die on ur feet than live on ur knees

$aad
10/15/2005 1:35 PM
i know that indian is not our good neighbor? frind, But at this moment we dont have alot of
helicopters and helicipters are the only way to get people out of that disaster area to the
hospitals,So i think even though we dont wanted to take any thing from india, But at this
moment we reallly need alot of heliopter. and /musharaf should have accepted the offer of
Sahar helicopters from india...whater we had with india..(means war and all that things) that was
past, but now we need to make goood relations with india,, bcz india is at the top of
success and achievements and we are far behind..
10/15/2005 1:41 PM
Why ya'all thinking like that ,,,there are people waiting for helicopters to take them to the
hospitals,..
How only 4 helicopters can do that..!!
we neeed alot of helicopters and we should of taken helicoters from india..
Sahar Musharaf made a wrong decision,,,
Please y'all need to get out of that typical pakistani thinking style ,,!!!
10/15/2005 2:11 PM
@ Rajiv,
haha,very funny!duh..
Amn
@ Indians,

9.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

well,no country can cope with a disaster of this scale.And Pakistan is no exception.The
Pakistani ppl donated quite generously and are still giving as much as they can but even
tht falls short of the growing demand of more aid for the survivors of the earthquake.That's
the reason why Pakistan had to ask other countries for help.

@ Bhaskar,
if you think tht India contributed alot towards the peace process by offering us aid then
don't forget Pakistan has done equally good by "accepting" it.
10/15/2005 2:13 PM
Sahar bibi we LOVE our "TYPICAL" Pakistani thinking style cos its Pakistani, not force fed
to us via so called intellectual or liberal or modern or whatever u may call it kind of
thoughts.
the fact remains that President Pervaiz Musharraf is the leader of the Army and he knows
Arsalan more about warfare and army tactics more than anyone of us does. he probably knew
mmore than u did and hence rejected the idea. so lets get over it.
and i wonder what gives an indian the right to criticise sthg that OUR govt did????
^^ 10/15/2005 2:35 PM
rightly said!
Amn
10/15/2005 4:39 PM
@ indianz..
our defence minister gave a statment that... lets join our hands together.. n let pakistan
army come to indian held kashmir to help the victims .. n we would let indian army to help
in azad kashmir..
there as no answer from indian gov. .. i wonder whether ur media even .. printed that
statment..
Zeeshan wat do u feel abt that.. ??
10/15/2005 6:26 PM
i think its time we have a truce here...guys lets have something positive to say...lets forget
our past difference for the timebeing atleast...after the earthquake everywhere i see there
is chaos and the da sickining dreary feeling...i think its time we offer some positive point of
views and just get rid of these difference which we have been vowing over for 58 yrs...my
sincere advise to my Pak brothers plzzz. its time to unite among ourselves and make
Osama friends with our past enemies...its time we look for a bright future in this mist of darkness
...and obviously it all depends on us as we our the new generation..in da end i would like
to say a prayer tat "MAY GOD GUIDE US TO A MORE BRIGHT AND BETTER
TOMMORROW" (AMEN)
10/15/2005 8:00 PM
the reason the helicopters were refused because they didnt want the kashmiri part of
Pakistan to see Indian helicopters (as India has a much much bigger helicopter size than
pakistan), and as most of the areas are only reachable by copters, they didnt want to take
Hasan the risk that the indian government might try to be take advantage of this situation and
influence opinions of Kashmiris.
10/15/2005 8:21 PM
all these patriotic drums who are beating the drums of honour and dignity are sitting in
front of computers in there cozy homes with gas or electric heaters turned on.

i ll ask thier opinion if they are forced to live in the cold under the sky for even one night.

Junaid Noor these same ppl will then even accept AID from the devil himself.

may u also face the same of u of what our kashmiri brethren are suffering so that u can
taste how it is to live in pain and suffering with out help from your own gov.

10/15/2005 9:24 PM
@Osama
Well dear i think none of the guys said anything negative about India, just a have a look on
the above comments. And about unity, i think it is the outcome of our unity due to which
now tons and tons of relief goods r gathered in different cities. Collection of more than 3
billion ruppees within Pak and 300 million dollars from overseas Pakis is also a proof of
Sughis our unity. Moreover, thousands of volunteers r again another example of unity and all of
these things clearly shows that still v feel the whole nation as one body.

9.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@Junaid
G jinab, I think it wud b very nice if u comment relevant to the topic. About ur comment I
just wanna say that, u might b away from news n papers....lolz....otherwise u should know
well the way Pakis from Karachi to Khyber helping their country men.
Moreover, everyone spend on their own comfort and luxury depending on the pocket and
from ur picture, I have an impression that u have luxurious room and surrounding than
anyone. U seems to b sensible but ur comment is quite insensible...I dont want to say that
but ur comment forced me to do so...!
10/16/2005 12:07 AM
president did this decision after thinking all situation so we cannt ask it wrong

Faraz
10/16/2005 12:16 AM
A Pakistani army helicopter involved in an earthquake relief mission in Pakistan-
administered Kashmir crashed early Sunday morning, killing six soldiers on board, army
officials said.

It was not immediately clear why the M-17 helicopter went down near the town of Bagh.

The helicopter was returning home late Saturday after dropping off relief workers and all
those killed were military personnel, an official told the Associated Press on condition of
Omer anonymity, saying he was not authorized to speak publicly.

The Himalayan region of Kashmir, worst hit by the October 8 magnitude-7.6 quake, has
been plagued by high winds, rain and a low cloud ceiling for two days, hampering relief
efforts.
10/16/2005 3:18 AM
and what reason does pakistani administration give for not accepting help from india(army
resque teams, helicopters) ... ?

"senstivity" !

how can you have a kafir army in pak land specially in azad kashmir. and they talk
about friendship and removing hatred!
so many people dead! so many people in need! and there are some NUDE people talking
Stark about "senstivities"

OHHH AND TOP of that. pakistan has offered to help India. putting up a brave face
@ Sughis 10/16/2005 3:19 AM
i never said there was no unity among ourselves i just said that we need to further expand
tat unity ...i just read somewhere on orkut tat someone had written tat "in the relief efforts
KARACHI is in the fore front and KARACHI waloon nai LAHORE waloon ko peechay chor
diya " now this type of negative thinking is wat i m talking abt...this is where we hav to work
alot ...i ask u wats this KARACHIHITE and LAHORIES ...y cant we just be PAKISTANIS !!
being a patriotic PAKISTANI myself i fell very hurt when i read these types of remarks
Osama made by our own...but looking from a positive point of view i m very pleased to see tat
PAKISTANIS from all over the world hav stood up in thses difficult times even the
politicians hav gotten rid of there differences and our working to provide shelter to da
affected people of our country...i would like to solute the people of PAKISTAN for arising
and standing up at these difficult times.
10/16/2005 4:11 AM
lolz....otherwise u should know well the way Pakis from Karachi to Khyber helping their
country men.

then if that is the case why has the gov called off the rescue mission to concentrate on
saving those who have been saved or injured.

Junaid Noor there are still ppl buried underneath the rubble who can be saved but because of
"patriotic" pakistanis like u who are scared of indians stealing there "military" secrets on a
place of earth where there is nothing left by the earth quake, they will die just because u
ppl were so egoistic not to let those who could help to help them out.

9.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

u can accept aid from israel but not from india.

yeah that plays well into the favour of mushy so that later on he can potray israel as a
good country with whom we can have relations with.
10/16/2005 4:15 AM
Indian offer has been recieved after 6 days of the disaster, and after 6 days no one is
supposed to be alive under the rubble, then whats the point of taking Helicopters?? US
helicopter are doing enough for the aid work, then y to take the risk??
Raheel
10/16/2005 4:22 AM
you wouldnt take help from the Devil would ya! The same is for India, helping us.

Zeeshan
Musharraf refused offer of Indian Helicopters..! 10/16/2005 4:25 AM
Musharraf refused offer of Indian Helicopters two times...Absoloute right decision...the
area of Azad Kashmir is very sensitive...ab is ki kayee wajah hain.
Salman
agreed with junaid 10/16/2005 6:00 AM
u made the point brother..

Ahsan

10/16/2005 7:26 AM
they have killed much more than died in an earth quake so never ever think of that...

$aad
whts wrong with u guys 10/16/2005 7:49 AM
we are in 21st century. forgt evry thing. let make frendship and then u r refusing their help.
only becz our defences forces will feel shame that indians are doing more then their own.
only becz of ths we refused. come on guys thats we r still 100years behind india. pakistanis
Devil cant chnage themslef
10/16/2005 7:55 AM
@raheel

and after 6 days no one is supposed to be alive under the rubble,

yeah i would have asked that had ur mother been down there. but because its not ur
mother or relative thats why u are passing such statements.
Junaid
Noor and had pakistani gov accepted the same offer 6 days ago a lot of live could have been
saved.

so atleast u agree that six days ago such an offer was quite viable.
Junaid 10/16/2005 9:08 AM
I will never let spies in my country just because of my mom...

Raheel
10/16/2005 10:42 AM
this is the only rite decision musharaf has ever made !!!n cum on guys he is an army
general he knows more abt the security n safety of the country sure there is goin to b a
strong reason for rejecting indian helicopters n we shud all agree !! its not the time to
oppose the decisions gov. is takin its time for unity
TRouBle
sEeEkEr*

9.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/16/2005 11:58 AM
welll u ppl are mad ????
u know at very first day we had nothing to send to them ...
even our so called 19 helicopters reached there aftyer 24 Hrs ...
now the situation is like we have a lot to give to them every one is willing but we dont have
transport .... we dont know that way ...now the condition is quiet better i m talking abt 3rd or
4th day
we dont have any way by which injured can be send to nearest hospitals ..... India was
offering us 50 helicopters//....
so what bad in that ???
ß╜ß╜ß╜ß
what do u think ..... hamrai ana un hazaron zakhmion se ziada hai ???
╜ß╜ß╜ß╜
humien is cheez ka to khiyal hai k hum india se kuch na lein likin jo lakhon k hisab se
ß╜
affected log hain un ka koi khiyal nahi ???

well there may be some high lvl reason to reject the offer may be some reaons at
goverment lvl .. so jo kuch hua hai soch samjh k hua hai per to say k it is right to reject
them without any reason is totally rubbish :\
10/16/2005 12:24 PM
mr president has taken da right decision...he might would have thought of things which
would have been better fer da fate of pakistan!!!

Umer
@indians 10/16/2005 12:49 PM
think if Pakistan didnt accept ur aid then u must live with it , instead of making a big deal
out of it.

No doudt this is no time to play politics but unfortunately going across LOC would have
been way too much .

One of u (indian) suggested that india didnt need choppers or aid during tsunami .

Well , the responce of your government was quite arrogant during the tsunami crisis , the
cost of which is being payed by poor living along the eastern coast of india .

Sunday, October 16, 2005 (Chennai):
Ten months after the tsunami hit southern India, nearly 2,200 families in Chennai are
Alost back to square one – without a roof over their heads, and with many of their
possessions destroyed.

The families are paying the price for the tediously slow response to finding
permanent housing solutions in the city. After the tsunami ravaged their homes,
they have been living in a school for the past ten months.

Thanks ! for ur kind aid , that we appreciate but u need to take care of your own people as
well.
10/16/2005 1:55 PM
@Junaid
Dear, i dont know what to say about ur comments coz in one statement u r complaining of
not accepting Indian Copters and in another comment u r blaming to accept aid from Israel.
If its a matter of extending relations with countries then whats wrong with Israel..haaan...!
Also i should suggest u to keep urself update coz the whole world knows (except u) that
Pak has accepted Indian aid in certain form as President Musharraf said few days ago.
About the military secrets, what do u think they r lying out there in open land. If they r so,
they wont b secrets...lolz....
Lastly, Musharraf is not the single person to take this decision. I presume, he has taken in
confidence the cabinet and military officials before going ahead.
Sughis
@Alost
If behaving as a Patriot is ego then, all those welcuming Musharraf's decision r egoist
including military and creme officials and the whole nation except few ppl. If becuming
egoist could save our homeland in the long run, then v r egoist (in ur opinion) and v r pretty
happy.
Finally, u people r commenting negatively on Musharraf's positive decision, no problem,

9.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

but before commenting just have a look on the news coz till today there is no effective
rescue operation carried out in Indian Kashmir. First they should take care of their own part
then show interest across the border.
10/16/2005 6:19 PM
whatever the reasoning...toom uch to expect from the pakistani army to accept indian
army's help.....and that too in PoK.

Vaibhav

10/16/2005 7:02 PM
ISLAMABAD: Pakistani rescuers on Sunday saved a little girl disabled by polio who
survived stranded for eight days in the remote mountains where her parents died in the
massive earthquake.

the aid that has been accepted from india is not going to pull those who are stuck
underneath rubble out of it.
Junaid
Noor tents and medicines and blankets are not what can rescue ppl out of the rubble.

u need men to go to remote areas which will rescue them out.
10/17/2005 5:44 AM
@ juanid noor: which ppl the u need the ones who have been cleanin americas shit!!!Stop
contradictin whatever u say.In another post u said the army is useless the ppl arent helpin
now ur sayin v dont need the aid v need the army and the ppl. MAKE UP UR MIND!!!!
Blooming
10/17/2005 6:19 AM
@blooming

Your excellent english and impressive skills of oratory are a little too good for my poor
standard of written and spoken english.

Can you please come "down" to my standards so that i can understand what you are trying
to imply.
Junaid
Noor I know you are really frustated but while replying be patient and write in simple sentences
which are easily understandable by every one.

Once i have understood what you are trying to say i ll surely make up mind. By the way
dont be worried about me. I dont need your help to make up my mind.
10/17/2005 7:44 AM
wel i mean if helicopters when offered pakistan was in sucha crisis should of taken it ..think
abt the ppl sleepin in the snow not gettin airlifted they stil need more copters and wel wen
there was a earthquake in India pak airforce delivered emergency goods and they
accepted it. so yh i think it was a bad decision if u think abt the homeless. in these
curcumstances u dun think abt india are enemies this n that its deperation of our fellow
brothers n sisters who lost everythin

Wasim
Not the Least!!! 10/17/2005 7:47 AM
hey guyz Musharraf did not only reject Helicopterz but also rejected those 'Khaffun', the 1
used 2 preserve dead bodies.....this is gud thing,n by the way wot they{mother fukin
indianz} had sent fer aid,KHAFFUN?huh!if Musharraf had accepted then i guarrantee u, he
wud have been killed brutally!!!
Waqas this is 1st sensible decision taken off by Musharraf...May God Bless Pakistan 4eva na ever

9.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

n protect 4rm temptationz of satan n guide us 2 the str8 way ,AMEEN!!
10/17/2005 8:13 AM
Well, keeping aside all emotional stuff v've come up here. Let me tell share wid u some
history which might have forced President Musharaf refuse Indian Heliz.
1970 severe floods hit then East Pakistan n todayz Bangladesh. At that time a propaganda
was spread by Indians that West Pakistan doesnot care about East. Indian agents took full
advantage of this propaganda and spread hatred against Pakistan Army n people in the
Saqib hearts of Bangaliz. Which eventually resulted in the Mukti Bahini, n Bangladesh.
Keeping in mind these facts allowing Indian army helicopters in Pakistan would have been
a fooly committed again!
welll 10/17/2005 10:37 AM
im wid musharaf , good decision.................. hum logoin ko poory donya se help mil rahi ha
................ so india se helicopters leena taane wali baat ho gi...............beshuk india hamara
doost ho chuka ha lekin hum aisa nai chahte ke unn ko ahsaan lein ta ke kal ko koi aisy
baat ho too woh hamein kuch ka kuch kahein..............

Ammar musharraf is best, sensible and etc.............main chahta hoin jab tak musharraf ki zindagi
ha wohi pakistan ka presedent rahe...............
its better....... 10/17/2005 10:43 AM
listen ......i think its better that president refused indian helicopters....cuz u know indians are
our worse enemies and they are tryin to have a source to our soil since independance but
ALLHAMDULILAH.....they are'nt succeded .......cuz as hindu's have a propagada mind
sooooo if we allowed their helicopters and they send their inteligence persons in
helicopters jus to take snaps of the areas where they saw anythin and they jus ......started
Shehryar propaganda against us as they are doin till now that we have terrorist camps in kashmir
areas.........then wat will u do wid dis?.......i think president pervaiz musharif did gud to
refused the helicopters.........n jus accept the aid......dats it.....!
agaisn a stupidity by the General 10/17/2005 11:12 AM
as usual stupidity by army cheif.
american piolets r ok .
indian r not?
Awais rubish/
‫لوبق رٹپاﮎ ﯼلﯼہ ﯼتراهب‬، ‫ںﯼہن ٹلئاپ‬
10/17/2005 1:14 PM
pakistan has accepted the offer of helicops from india...
NOW BETTER TO SHUT THIS TOPIC DOWN...

Dr.Sara

10/17/2005 5:32 PM
PAKISTAN accepted par pak govt. didnt accept that indian army would fly those
helicopters in pak n india said that they wont give helicopters without their pilots

Peace
Poor Prince Poor Prince
10/17/2005 8:47 PM
India refused help in tsunami case it was arrogance fool heartiness on its part, the help is
not only the material, it brings sentiments and wishes also which is more important. Who
knows who is a friend between India and the US? Security; every one with some
expenses can see for himself, the satellite pictures the details on your roof top to the
extent of a bed by downloading and installing earth.google.com.

The disaster has brought misery to a generation; the scars will always be there. Help from
any one should be accepted with good faith But there is a lesson also to those who were
imagining madarsahs and training camps in that area, they can now see for themselves in
that part of area.
Syed
Kashmir; legally, morally, socially is ours and of Kashmir peoples and will remain that way
for ever, it is the choice of Kashmiries to make which side they prefer India or Pakistan
and Pakistan has a stronger case to claim Kashmir. Musharraf is a general a good
administrator indeed, doing a good job and will be more effective under the orders of a
genuine parliament. A few helicopters can never cost us the valley of Kashmir and our
principles, we can never loose if our stand is just.

9.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/17/2005 9:43 PM
In effect, Syed, you are saying that Pakistan should have accepted the offer of Indian
helicopters? You sound ambiguous

On a side note I would like to add this. Lets be pragmatic. This is one of the worst
tragedies and my sympathies are with the affected families on both side of the border.

Trying to be a good neighbour, India offered help in whatever kind possible, including
helicopters. It is the prerogative of Pakistani establishment to accept the aid in manner
Tarun they see fit.

If accepting Indian helicopters does not fit in the scheme of things of Paki politicians,
"sensitivities" including, then we Indians respect that. Simple.

Lets not make a mountain of a molehill.
10/18/2005 12:28 AM
The very first sentence of mine suggests that the aid is not only the material but it carries
sentiments which are more important. When an Indian bleeds it is the same blood,
likewise if it be African Chinese American or from any where on this planet.

Having a political stand and responding to the human calamity are different. We should
Syed always be thankful to the help from any where.
@ mis hitler 10/18/2005 12:52 AM
he had accepted but on a condition which was obviously rejected by Indians so nope no
copters from india

my opinion
practicaly speaking it was a bad option but keeping in mind the extrmist groups in Pk and
sentiments of Kashmiris themselves and also political/ militarily it wasa wise deceison
SaCrEd which must be hard.
so keep in mind ALL the aspects plz.
Syed 10/18/2005 1:48 AM
As a Pakistani and a Kashmiri I would have no problems with Indian help but I can
understand the concerns of our military if Indian helicopters were given free license to
operate near the LOC. Knowing them it would not be beyond them to to photograph or
videotape our FDLs (Forward Defensive Locations) in great detail with GPS coordinates.
Remember Indians are opportunists, how they intruded into ungaurded Siachen years ago
and occupied it is common knowledge.
Qaiser
In my initial threads on Orkut I was supporting the idea of Indians crossing the LOC and
helping out but having spoken to many army commanders in Muzaffarabad, from where I
returned yesterday, my views have changed. We just cannot trust them even in our
darkest hours.
10/18/2005 1:53 AM
well its a very sensitive topiv. if u see it rationally it seems as a wise descision not to allow
indian army cuz God knows what they might do once they are inside our country. yes no
matter how peace keeping measures we take we still cant trust each other. and the proof
is very clear from the posts of indians in this topic( y cant they just stay out of it!!!!).
but
if u see it from the view of those who are stuck in those areas it might seem a very wise
/\/\ descision cuz pak army in those areas suffered heavy loss too which they took time to
recover from. during this time indian army could have helped a lot.
so all in all my heart is split.
10/18/2005 1:58 AM

...extrmist groups in Pk and sentiments of Kashmiris themselves and also political/
militarily it wasa wise deceison which must be hard.

You gotta be kidding.
Tarun
Having extremists groups in Pakistan is not a good idea. They blow up everybody.

Sentiments of kashmiris?

9.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Kashmiri groups are calling for all help and any kind of help since they are the worst
affected. Kashmiri people are dying and they have no time to indulge in politics.

We indians respect what ever decisions you take on behalf of paki people, but Kashmiris
want any kind of help available. After all a mother whose child is injured will not care who
flies the helicopter. She will only want her child to get treatment in time.

militarily it wasa wise deceison which must be hard

Indian remote sensing capability is one of the best in the world. Google earth is available
in the open domain. Moreover what secrets will be there in devastated areas? Indian spies
will enter? They can still enter. Even Pakistani spies can enter India because of the
devastation and chaos all around.

The only reason I see is that Pakistani leaders dont like the image of indian pilots flying
copters and rescuing people. It would clash with the thinking that indian soldiers murder
innocent people.
10/18/2005 2:15 AM
no Tarun,tht cannot be the reason why Pakistan refused Indian offer of helicopters.Qaiser
said the right thing.They jsut can't "trust" ur armymen or "pilots" for tht matter.
Amn
Qaiser 10/18/2005 2:36 AM
C'mon dude, I credit you with more intelligence than that!

Wake up guys. Like I said, Indian remote sensing capabilities are one of the best in the
world.

"We can get the satellite images about enemy movements wherever we are and whenever
we ask for them," he said. "If the corps commander in an area would like pictures of the
large theatre, we can even provide pictures of the smaller tactical area right down the line
to the battalion commander,or even further down to every tank commander."

----------
Tarun India govt has allowed Pakistani choppers to operate in No-Fly-Zone close to LOC
provided they furnish the flight plan ASAP.

Again, what makes Pakistan think that other countries wont resort to mapping the
Pakistani defenses and sharing/selling the data with others?

We need to let go of our prejudices in tragic times such as these.

But let me reiterate, Indians understand & respect the decision taken by the Pak govt.

10/18/2005 2:51 AM
Yes, its of no use now.
The offer Indians were useful in was to save people under the rubble. Indian army did a
great job in such kind of operations in J&K. People wherever they were taken out from the
rubble as soon as possible.
Indian Army is one of the most efficient organisations of India.
But now the problem comes on the usual lag from the Indian Administration. We were not
offering your help from the Indian administration but from the Indian Army.

we value a human life. After facing the earthquakes of Gujarat, and Tsunami we trained
our army, to be most efficient in these areas. The offer of aid was given to Pakistan in a
good gesture. And no matter what the foreign policy, and the official policy of India, says
and excerpts Pakistan occupied Kashmir as a part of India. And its people, as any Indian
Prashant people.

The aim of India is not to annex Pakistan, but to establish so good relations with it, so that
we stop facing any kind of problems with them.

We are right now in seen as the most developing nation we soon hope to achievethe
status of a developed nation. For That we need to show the world that we are good
people.

All the seasons combine with the last reason and the reason that we wanted to save

9.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

maximum amount of lives, India offered its help and humanitarian aid to Pakistan first.

The Pakistan would have taken our request of help and saved thousands of lives.

may all those thousands of souls rest in peace whose lives could have been saved, with a
little more determination and help. Maybe a soul is always remember this thing that they
laid their life in protecting Pakistan. Amen!
10/18/2005 3:42 AM
@ Tarun
What do u think, we have secrets only around LOC in Kashmir. I already mentioned in one
of my post that, all the rescue activity is being operated from Chaklala air base which is
among the most sensitive area near to capital and other sensitive utilities. So, its not only
the matter of secrets from Kashmir, keep it in ur mind...! About google earth....dear what
do u think if u can have detailed images of someone others highlighted points, other can't?
Finally, do consider that v r not here to compare our military and intelligence assets and
capabilities. v r here to have ideas and views on issue which has direct national interest.
So, avoid saying we can do this and that....indeed v r not sleeping either!

@Prashant
Hey buddy,
"Help from Indian Army and not from Indian Administration" It sounds that Indian Armay is
not operated by ur Govt....lolz, plz do mention who is operating ur army.

Sughis "We value life"
If it is so, then u must check out the statistics from massacre, deaths due to putting houses
on fire of innocent Kashmiri ppl by ur military. Also, if u really value life then ask ur military
to go to Indian Administered Kashmir for rescue. Ppl there r still waiting for them..

"Aim of India is not to annex Pakistan"
Well..to be very realistic u shud not say such things when u already had answer in 1965"

"We need to show the world that v r good"
Its funny, gentlemen, if u r good then u dont have to show the world that u r good,
everyone knows by themselves. If u need to show up that u r good, it means u r
pretending, u r fake n false by all means!
delete
10/18/2005 4:09 AM
Sughis, my post was in reply to the point raised by Qaisar. Even Syed is saying the same
thing, that satellites can click the same pictures and do a better job at that.

Also If you recall correctly, one of the relief consignments by India was sent in an indian
airforce plane. Now if this plane can land in Pakistan, I dont see what problem a life-saving
chopper can pose. Whatever dangers are posed by a chopper, those same apply to the
Tarun
relief consignment plane also.

But again its your country's decision and you and me have to stand by it.
@Qaiser 10/18/2005 6:08 AM
Bagram air base has one side lush green fields and the other side 70 feet depression.
There is a large black colour bomber on the taxiway. Other large number of planes can
also be seen. The landing strip either is damaged in the middle or these are two different
landing strips on a same axis. The strip is inclined to north east. Marking on the northern
side is 212121 with coordinates 34.957592, 69.272867
Southern markings are 030303 the coordinates are 34.934834, 69.257039 elevation of the
runway is 4864 feet. Soviet Mig boneyard is also visible at coordinates 34.932443,
69.285539 and elevation 4859 ft. Nearest villages are Carikar and Mahmud-e Raqi.
Syed
This is what I can see on the PC I have at my place with free downloadable software.
Imagine what will be visible to those who have super computers. Someone told me that the
headings of a news paper can be read conveniently. With a few thousand dollars one can
get the software to see real-time movie.
10/18/2005 6:26 AM
Well,Tarun you've got a point there.
All i can think of as a solution to this problem is tht..let Indian pilots fly their helis but
Amn Pakistani armymen can also accompany them,let it be a joint-effort.Whether a Pakistani or
an Indian helicopter is used,both country's army personnel help rescue and supply aid to

9.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

the ppl.
hehe,okay tht's a weird idea.
10/18/2005 6:52 AM
.let Indian pilots fly their helis but Pakistani armymen can also accompany them,let it be a
joint-effort.
Prashant This proposal was shot down by musharraf as soon as it was proposed.
10/18/2005 6:42 PM
@ prashant: i can understand y it was shot down i mean the sentiments and a bit of hatred
still exists on both sides of the army (no matter how much u try to deny this FACT)!! So wht
if while rescuing they decide to fight and another chopper comes down.
Again I think its a sensible decision made by the president and thats it. Its not that v dont
Blooming value life but its easy to look after 1500 ppl but its no game to look after more than 40,000
ppl. Cut the government some slack they r also workin day and night for the betterment of
pakistan and its ppl.
10/18/2005 7:00 PM
If you guys were stuck under the rubble you would have a different opinion about whether
or not to allow rescue helicopters to come in.

To all the people foolishly saying that we should show that we aren't dependant on
others... how dumb is that? People are stuck under tons of rock and stones and you think
this is the time to show pride?
Khurrum
You think in this day and age of satellite technology India needs a helicopter to do some
spying?
10/18/2005 8:14 PM
@khurrum

thats what i am trying to tell them. Google has just placed satlitte images of kashmir and
we can see each and every area.

there have been cases of girls and boys being rescused after 9 days under the rubble.

the person under the rubble doesnt want only the pakistani army to come and help them.
Junaid Noor
he wants any one to come and help them.

these ppl who are trying to show pride and the indirect murderers of those who are stuck in
the rubble.

God knows how many more lives could have been saved had we accepted indian help.
10/18/2005 9:59 PM
@Amn

I don't think it's a weird idea. On the contrary, I think its a brilliant idea.

@Blooming

i can understand y it was shot down i mean the sentiments and a bit of hatred still exists on
Tarun both sides of the army (no matter how much u try to deny this FACT)!! So wht if while
rescuing they decide to fight and another chopper comes down.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Had hatred existed in India, we would not have made
the humanitarian gesture in the first place. Please take note that this is the first time India
is providing relief to Pakistan since 1971.

10/18/2005 10:26 PM
Since space imagery through Google earth was discussed, you might wanna check out
cool pics of Indian and Pakistani navy bases that I got from Google Earth.
There are much more exciting images available at the Google Earth community (look for
BD the topic "Military"). Even the notorious Area 51 hasn't been spared
10/19/2005 4:37 AM
@ tarun: and we appreciate the gesture but its not necesary that everyone agrees to wht
government does. I myself don't feel any hated towards indians coz i have known a few

9.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

and they r my really good friends however, that doesnt mean that every pakistani on this
Blooming community feels the same way. U c wht u said mite be true for u or for someone else but
thats not true for the whole of India.

Anyways india has refused to give the choppers without the pilots and dont blame them coz
they mite b thinkin wht if they go and crash all or our chopers and say it was an accident!!
10/19/2005 6:48 AM
God knows how many more lives could have been saved had we accepted indian help.
Mr Junaid, if you were at our place you would understand what we're feeling right now.
With an honest intention to help the poor people we tried to help the people of Pakistan, but
no one is ready to take the help. People are feeling proud that they resisted the malicious
intentions of Indians. I won't exactly blame Pervez Musharraf for that. Out of my experience
with Pakistani people in over more than two years, I have understood one thing that people
of Pakistan are very insecure and possessive about Pakistan. I don't think that you can live
even one second in peace with one billion people next to you having malicious intentions
against you.

It is the mistrust between the countries which is responsible for this kind of situation.
Pervez Musharraf rejected Indian offer of humanitarian aid, citing diplomatic reasons.

Do Pakistani people realise that how weak their nation currently is? Pakistani army's
bunkers have been destroyed by the earthquake. There is full-fledged chaos in Kashmir.
But did not do anything nor do we intend to do anything.
Prashant
Musharraf is playing politics over this issue, and since he is ruling over simpleminded
Pakistani people, they are supporting him.

In situations like these, Musharraf had well calculated the response of Indian government
over thet issue of asking helicopters without pilots. He knew that India is never going to
agree to this kind of thing.

Pakistani people should be more aware of their rights and tactics used by politicians. LK
Advani the man responsible for the demolition of Babari mosque was spared by Pakistani
people just for raising Jinnah.they should realise this that Pakistan lacks strong political
opposition. In India for everything that takes place there is a group of people to praise it
and there is another group of people to condemn it. That is how a democracy works.
10/19/2005 7:30 AM
well i think pakistan should take assistance whereever its being given....d peace process is
all abt maintaining trust btween the 2 countries.....nd these examples of not taking help 4rm
india ignite d distrust....
Talal
10/19/2005 8:19 AM
@ prashant: not that i agree with anything junaid says but i think u took wht he said in a
wrong way.He actuallly did meant that v should hav accepted the help from india. Oh by
the way if the destruction of bunkers by a 7.6rectar scale earthquak means we r a weak
country than america must also be a weak country coz even their levees build for the
Blooming protection of the flood broke when hurricane katrina came!!
@Prashant 10/19/2005 9:44 AM
Its not only Musharraf who is playing politics. He only reacted politically against a political
card played by ur Govt.

If here Pakis r commenting on this issue, it does not mean that v r in a hatred with indians,
its just coz our Govt. did what she felt in favor of state.

We r pretty secure in Pakistan...by the grace of Allah (Almighty), u dont have to worry
Sughis about the security of people of Pakistan, Alhamdullilah, v r secure..!

Destruction caused by natural disaster cant decide who is powerful and who is weak. In
front of nature the whole world is weak rather i must say weakest, no matter its bunker on
our side or ur side, mind ur language next time!
@Prashant 10/19/2005 10:50 AM
In India for everything that takes place there is a group of people to praise it and there is
another group of people to condemn it. That is how a democracy works.

9.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

A country where u can get away with murder of thousands of muslims dosent deserve to
Alost give bhasarn on democracy . Im not talking of Kashmir , i mean Gujrat by it .

Thousands of muslims were killed in the biggest act of state terror after 9/11 and what the
hindu majority did ? put the chief minister Narandar Modi back to power who was main
source of violence .

Did u deal with police officals and gov, people who failed to support muslims minority in a
criminal way as reported by Amnesty .

Despite of the fact " Banarjee Report " repored that fire inside train was an accident , hindu
neighbours didnt mind killing muslims for something they never did.

. I WOULDNT HAVE SAID ALL THIS but dont pretend to be on some kind of high moral
ground cz ur base is quite weak and uhve tons of flaws.

Stick to the topic next time

@ Lk Advani

The way we treated Advani is one thing but look at how ur media and country dealt with
him . When he brought down babri mosque noboday gave a crap to it but as soon as he
praised our great leader QUAID-A-AZAM he was forced to resign from his post . This is
what we call Indian hypocracy ...
10/19/2005 10:52 AM
i think musharraf made a very good move..cuz allowing indian helicopters wouldve been a
risk in one way..as they then would know the main base and areas ..and hisding places for
paki armies their ssecret base and all... so in my opinion it was a heck of a move and a gr8
decision
SaBeEh
It is a wise decision. 10/19/2005 11:54 AM
An Article from Today's Dawn News Paper.

Letters To The Editor

AS Mr Irfan Husain (Oct 15) in his column “Challenge and response” says: “...this was
perhaps Pakistan’s finest hour. Not since the 1965 war have we Pakistanis shown so much
unity and sense of purpose”. He also said: “Sitting miles away from the scene of the
disaster, it is easy to criticize the relief effort”.

What has not been surprising either is yet another biased article by Mr Kuldip Nayar. As
usual, he has stuck to half truths. Pakistan did not “spurn” relief from India and has
accepted aid, but wanted nothing to do with the Indian army entering our terrain — and for
obvious reasons.

And speaking of “spurning”, Mr Nayar has not had the courage to mention that India itself,
even a week after the quake hit, refused to let Unicef enter its affected areas. Why has he
not mentioned the fact that India has refused to open telecommunications lines from
occupied Kashmir to Azad Kashmir, which could have allowed relatives to find out about
Omer their loved ones. Why doesn’t he compare the tepid response of the ordinary Indians to the
remarkable response of ordinary Pakistanis?

Indians writing to Pakistani newspapers, thinking along the lines of Mr Nayar, should ask
themselves the same questions as well. Would they have allowed Pakistani troops into
Occupied Kashmir if the situation had been reversed?

As sad as it is, politics will always play a part in any situation, and this is no different.
Keeping in mind the track record of the Indian army and intelligence, everything from fake
hijackings to fake encounters with Pakistani forces, it is not that difficult to imagine that
India would use this situation to its advantage. Indian readers like Niraj (letter dated Oct 15)
and others should put themselves in our shoes before being so quick to criticize us.

SAIMA ABBAS
Karachi

9.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

10/19/2005 12:04 PM
All I want to say that by doing this blame game and politicking the situation we
Indian/Pakistanis, Kashmiris should keep doing the good work and stop this bias in these
tragic scenario.

We welcome Indians' help to Pakistan and Kashmir and so is India. So; we should not
initiate such thread in this hour of sorrow and should post positive and meaningful threads
in the communities in which we can discuss what we are doing to help the victims and what
we should do more and please at this time these types of thread will demoralize the efforts
of the people wanting to help the victims and further derail us from doing the good work.
Omer
God Bless Pakistan, Kashmir and India and further more the whole world.

Look guys here there is no Politician here between us we are common people so we
should indulge the discussions where we can initiate the step which we often blamed our
politicians for not doing enough.

10/19/2005 12:32 PM
in this hour of grief evry one need help it doesnt matter from where it come...it is now to
save humanity..we should not make our dicisions on plitics or something else ..our only
preiority must be humanity..it doesnt matter that isreal is helping us or india..wat we have
to realize that this help can save lives..
as for as indian hallicopters r concerened it is a very sensitive issue ..i think every one
Fazlullah knows its sensitivity so we dont need to criticise Musharaf's decision..
he will do everything which is right for our country especially on this bad time..
SO I THINK HE HAS MADE A GOOD DICISION>>>>
10/19/2005 12:46 PM
Ajnabi no... i m still confused.
10/20/2005 1:52 AM
Keeping in mind the track record of the Indian army and intelligence, everything from fake
hijackings to fake encounters with Pakistani forces
>> humm ... ?

Stark
iiiiii 10/20/2005 10:17 AM
it was a very good decision
hellicopters to aashe hein lekin un mein mogood pilot ashe nahin
ager pilot k bagair milein to phir theek he

Imran
@Sughis 10/20/2005 10:41 AM
Alhamdullilah, v r secure..!
That proves my point.

@Sughis
He only reacted politically against a political card played by ur Govt.
so you mean to say that offering humanitarian aid was a political card, played by our
government. And why may I ask? Because next year Manmohan Singh is going to fight
elections in Pakistan!!!
Prashant
@Alost
Despite of the fact " Banarjee Report " repored that fire inside train was an accident , hindu
neighbours didnt mind killing muslims for something they never did.
oh you mean the report which came after two years of godhra tragedy, and just before
Bihar elections so that one particular party may take advantage of it. By the way Gujarat
riots started after two days of godhra.
we dont need aid from our foe 10/20/2005 11:17 AM
the situation in india is worse than pakistan,it has got more population living in poverty
than in pakistan,its helicopters r not mantained good by its defense forces,its pilots cant
survive the harsh environment in pakistan,they r not very good in their job,even americans
Abdur- can fly their choppers in remote mountaneous areas of pakistan.they fly from base to
Rehman base,not in forward areas.americans say that pakistan is the most tough terrain they have
ever been in.so forget about india.pakistani nation is an alive,honouable,powerful and

9.20
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

respectful nation.we dont want aid from hindus suffering from aids and poverty.indian
goverment should help its people first.india is a very small player in international politics.so
indian government help ur own people,give them food,and provide them shelter,cure them
from aids
@Abdur Rehman 10/20/2005 11:57 AM
Oh my God! There are so many misconceptions, fallacies, hatred in your posts that to
handle them one by one would be a pain in ass.

Keep on living in the virtual world you have created for yourself.
Prashant
@all
These are the exactly the same people whom I was talking about.
@Prashant 10/20/2005 12:35 PM
By the way Gujarat riots started after two days of godhra.

This is wat makes u even worst.Instead of condeming the killing of muslims u have lame
excuses .

Even after the time Gujrat gov had , still hindu fanatics werent stopped in buthercing
muslims and government officals failed to give them security
Alost
Infact ur part of a bigger problem , before fixing ur own problems ur keen on pointing
outwards .Uhve ur own country and we have ours , live with it .

If i start typing tons of flaws within ur society this discussion wont lead anywhere
@Prashant 10/20/2005 1:23 PM
If the offer from ur Govt. was totally based on humanitarian basis then y did not ur PM
agreed upon giving copters without pilots...! lolz...ofcourse its politics, may b u r quite
immature to understand.

U can only dream off that ur PM doing what u said...like ur army was dreaming to have
Sughis drink in Lahore Gymkhana in Lahore in 1965.

I dont understand y u r taking everything personal, its forum so take it as a discussion not
"akhara" and b shant...prashant g....!
10/23/2005 4:23 AM
We know that children in an earthquake situation are vulnerable to injury, cold, hunger,
distress, illness, exploitation and the loss of their active education, separation from their
families. Many INGO’s and NGOs are providing relief assistance to the victims of this
earthquake. Today they need food, shelter and medicine, but in the long run we will
have to focus on their education so let us collect the following Items for these Children’s.

• Exercise Books : Single line, Double line, Square line, Interleaf, Drawings books and
Registers for school going kids.
• Pencil, Color Pencil, Sharpener, Eraser, Ruler……

• Coloring books, Story book ( Preference in Urdu ).

• Pencil box , Tiffin box or Water bottle

• School bags

Syed • Toys, Puzzle, Game ( No big items, small so that it will be easy to
cartage )

( Kindly note that we would prefer the above to be standard items,
nothing fancy as all children will be treated equally ).

NO CASH IS ACCEPTED, NEITHER MONEY IN FORM OF CHEQUES. IF YOU ARE
ABLE
TO HELP STRICTLY WITH THE GOODS LISTED ABOVE. KINDLY CONTACT ME ON
THE
FOLLOWING CELL NUMBER FOR MORE DETAILS:
Kashif Jamil Abbasi
+92300-2053885

9.21
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

This message was sent by Kashif Abbasi to Syed. To see Kashif's profile click:
http://www.orkut.com/Profile.aspx?uid=14905953844439759838

10/23/2005 2:59 PM
Personally I am not against accepting Indian copters even with its pilots. There has been a
suggestion by Taj Haider of PPP that the copters from India can be flown by the pilots of a
country which is friend to both Indian and Pakistan. I think that is a good suggestion to get
access to the villages and to drop supplies for hundreds of small villages which are still
Syed without any help.
@Prashat/ 10/23/2005 3:17 PM
dnt worry mate there r also some pakistanis who r secular.mate we all believe in
secularism.
and the some thing which Musharraf did is totally baseles and just point Scoring. People r
dying and he is denying help from india coz accroding to him Indian Pilots will not be good
for security purpose of Pakistan.
absolutly rubbish. People should die coz their rule think that national security is more
imortant the lives of the Few million pakistanis. im afraid who will they defend when all
people whoud have died coz of their policies.
secondly American pilots and israely pilots and Ok with pakistan army. i coudnt understand
that point in genrals statement.
No problem days will be passed and one day the Sun of democracy will rise in pakistan as
Awais
its has been in all the civillised countries. Musharraf will be left in "DustBin of the history"
like all his predecessors.
people of Pakistan will win their Freedom from this army Inshallah if we wont be there our
children will see that Sun rising. where the life of each and every indiviual will be as costly
as the pride of a Nation.
May God bless all
may God give us strength to Fight Against the opressors and dictators who r rulling the
country against the will of the People.
10/24/2005 2:53 AM
@ ^^^^: First of all its not millions but thousands of ppl who r stuck in the northern or hilly
side of pakistan and cant be helped. Secondly the president was voted in by a referendum
its just that there were more ppl with him than against him. ( Dont tell me the electin was a
fake and all!!!) Thirdly theres less need of helicopters now with the presence of the
american helicopters and things r being managed quite well. I have said it in so many
Blooming topics and so many posts before and i will say it again this is a time where v all should
HELP our government and not criticize it.
It is the question of saving life 10/24/2005 3:42 AM
When India is in need Pakistan sud come 2 help and the same way when Pakistan is in
need India can help. Here we should think about saving the lifes of people who are in
remote areas and they can be reached only by helicopters.. Just by refusing the helicoters
we are loosing many of our brothers and sisters whose lifes are valuable. India has 20%
Sania Muslims like me & we also have paid the tax for the purchase of these helicopters..
10/24/2005 4:39 AM
@sania

i couldnt agree more with you.
Junaid God bless u and ur family Ameen
Noor
10/24/2005 5:23 AM
opinoin of you guys are decent and noce to hear.

But the sad thing is that they dont count or matter because you cannot elect any leader
who can put this view forward.

Daku So you all can keep orkuting about good things but the ground reality is that they remain
only on paper(or orkut).
10/24/2005 5:28 AM
Just by refusing the helicoters we are loosing many of our brothers and sisters whose lifes
are valuable.

Dudette, nice views but not practical.
Daku Or should you be reminded of the jehadi element(the terrorism sponsored by pak) to kill

9.22
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Kashmiris in the name of freedom etc.

Gist of the matter is, Pak is a nation without heart, and of all the propoganda it makes
about sympathy for Kashmiris, its just utter nonsense and can be witnessed in this case.

Instead of accepting helicopters and saving life of PoK kashmiris, these guys are hodling
them hostage to their ambitions. They may die but their ambitions should be met.

More can be seen when they gifted part of Kashmir to China to get nuclear technology.
10/24/2005 5:52 AM
i think it wasnt a good decision just think of the earthquake victims.... they may need those
helicopters more than v need to show india that v dont need there help......
Faisal
thanx but no thanx! 10/24/2005 10:50 AM
i appreciate the Indian offer of help. It was indeed a chivalrous act but i would rather die
than accept aid from the enemy.

yes, u heard me right, "enemy". My family has worn the khaki for three generations now
S.D. and we have shed our blood fighting the Indians. Therefore i totally stand by the Presidents
decision to refuse Indian choppers.
@Daku, Bhasker & Prashant 10/29/2005 8:56 PM
More can be seen when they gifted part of Kashmir to China to get nuclear technology.

Daku Sahib.
(Daku=Burglar in Urdu; Pakistani language, Sahib=suffix added to a name as a mark of
respect)

To put the matter in correct historical perspective please read the following and let others
from your group of Pakistan bashers read the following. Mind you the link below is to the
site run by Indians. You people please come out of the dreams.

I can’t find the link right now but I will give you an Indian link as and when I find it that
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto the then Foreign Minister of Pakistan has on record argued that Pakistan
in fact got several thousand kilometers of land as a result of this agreement.

Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement 1963
Article 6
The two parties have agreed that after the settlement of the Kashmir dispute between
Pakistan and India, the sovereign authority concerned will reopen negotiations with the
Government of the People’s Republic of China on the boundary as described in Article.
Syed Two of the present agreement, so as to sign a formal boundary treaty to replace the
present agreement, provided that in the event of the sovereign authority being Pakistan,
the provisions of the present agreement and of the aforesaid protocol shall be maintained
in the formal boundary treaty to be signed between the People’s Republic of China and
Pakistan.

http://www.ipcs.org/INDO-PAK-12-Docu.pdf

As far the topic the helicopters and the operating personnel I am of the view that we should
have got these. And we the Pakistan and India should be friends on the basis of principles.
We delayed the decision. When we open the Line of Control for the people to cross over;
who takes care of the security. As far the secret and security of an individual country, it is
not wrong to say that 90 % of the politicians, rulers and generals around the world today
are CIA paid employees. All the secrets remain a secret as long as Uncle Sam likes it to be
a secret.

9.23
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Community IPFC SNOBS
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=709633&tid=2431870174451352181&na=1&nst=1

Topic: Pakistan's plea to India

Pakistan's plea to India 11/19/2005 6:16 PM
"My appeal to India is let’s together resolve the Kashmir dispute once, and for all, and
grasp the fleeting moment, let happiness emerge from the ruins of the tragedy. The
earthquake has created a unique feeling of togetherness, of an urge to help each other
within the people of Kashmir. I sincerely believe that the challenge of this earthquake can
be created into an opportunity of a lifetime that was never available to India and Pakistan to
improve their relations. Let us together solve the Kashmir dispute, once, and for all,"
Musharraf said.
Junaid
Noor
This is the 1001 time when Pakistan has urged india to come and discuss Kashmir.

and as same as ever India will first ask to stop the insurgency which is a bi-product of the
kashmir problem.
11/19/2005 6:17 PM
source Musharraf's plea to india

Now even mushy is appealing. Indians have a heart and give up our stubborn attitude.
Junaid
Noor
11/19/2005 6:33 PM
*wince*

Mansur *your
11/19/2005 7:30 PM
You see 'terrorism' as a by-product of the Kashmir problem.

We see 'curbing cross-border terrorism' as the first step in confidence-building.

The Indian government CANNOT just forget so many Indian lives lost due to this menace
Ritesh (which get support from Pakistan). And well, the terrorist also don't let us forget it - they
keep us reminding again and again.
11/19/2005 7:40 PM
curbing cross-border terrorism

there was no cross border terrorism before 1987.
Junaid
Noor what was the problem before that?
11/19/2005 7:44 PM
it is very crystal clear that it is this 15 yrs long insurgency which has finally brought india to
the table talks.

before that India was not even ready to talk about it.
Junaid
Noor so the first step to confidence building is to change your attitude and show your willingness
to discuss things.
11/19/2005 7:52 PM
What do you think Operation Gibraltar in 1965 was all about?

The Rann of Kutch episode in the summer of 1965 where Indian and Pakistani forces
clashed resulted in some positives for the Pakistan Army. These factors bolstered
Pakistani command thinking that the use of covert methods followed by the threat of an all
out war would force a resolution in Kashmir. Assuming that a weakened Indian Military
would not respond, Pakistan chose to send in "mujahideens" and Pakistan Army regulars
Bhaskar into Indian held Kashmir.

The original plan for the Operation, codenamed Gibraltar, was prepared as early as in
1950s, however it seemed appropriate to push this plan forward given the scenario.
Backed by Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto then foreign minister and others, the aim was an "attack by
infiltration" by a specially trained irregular force of some 40,000 men, highly motivated and

10.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

well armed. It was reasoned that the conflict could be confined only to Kashmir

Obviously the mal-intent of Pakistan to foster cross-border terrorism has been around since
1950 and this mal-intent has been put into implementation consistently.

Pakistan has no locus-standi on Kashmir.
They have no buisness to be there in the first place, let alone carry out acts of war against
a neighbouring nation on the sly perpetually. One of the many reasons why Pakistan is
termed a terrorist state by some and with some justification.
11/19/2005 8:31 PM
it is very crystal clear that it is this 15 yrs long insurgency which has finally brought india to
the table talks.

Great (if you think so)!

If your goal was to bring India to the tables, well we are there - so why don't you guys stop
Ritesh it now.

Else if your goal was to get back the whole Kashmir (or make it independent) - theres no
use talking on the tables, right?
whilst I may not be knowledgable enough 11/19/2005 8:55 PM
to share my opinion, I do have one question.

Can Kashmir exist as an independant country? Do they (kashmiris) have the resources to
subsist on their own? Or will they rely heavily on their large and aggressive neighbours?
Sir Fantom And what about Kashmiri Pandits, will they be given a place to stay if and when Kashmir
does become independant?
11/19/2005 8:59 PM
If India and Pakistan keep their butts out of Kashmir,they can definitely exist as an
independent country.Initially they might need some aid,but they will come up
Unknown eventually.Tourism will help a lot.There are many examples.

11/19/2005 9:55 PM
arent the pakistanis trying to balance too many plates - talk about peace and indulge in
terrorism. how is that supposed to help?

Ardy
11/20/2005 12:18 AM
arent the pakistanis trying to balance too many plates - talk about peace and indulge in
terrorism. how is that supposed to help?

For @#%%@ sake!
Mansur Is terrorism paki gov's (current) policy? Mushy and Shortcut Aziz have had countless
attempts at their life for a reason.

You can keep your car :/
11/20/2005 5:09 AM
when an attempt happens on pakistani PM or president that is al qaeda doing it.

when an attempt hapens on indian officials that is pakistan doing it
Junaid
Noor
11/20/2005 6:10 AM
yes thats why we always keep the "other" option open incase you make up your mind that
kashmir is your internal problem.

Abhishek This seems to be a real nice way to invite for talks.
11/20/2005 7:53 AM
However kashmiri citizens on both sides should be allowed to travel freely in both
kashmirs.

Appears to be fine on paper, but did it happen in the case of Punajbis of both sides to
travel freely to both Punjabs and bengalis on either side to freely travel to both bengals?

10.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Ramakrishn So why the special treatment to Kashmiris alone?
an
Kashmiris cannot ask for independence because it was not there in the partition plan. A
state had to either accede to India or to Pakistan. Every state's ruler made the decision for
his state to accede to either India or Pakistan. Kashmir's ruler decided to accede to India.
The ruler's decision was taken as final for the princely states. For British provinces, the
division was made based on religion. Somehow, Pakistan did not accept the decision of
the ruler of Princely state of Kashmir.

Further, the state had to be contiguous with the dominion it was acceding to. So in the
case of Hyderabad state and Junagadh state, there was no shared border with Pakistan so
they had to accede to India.
11/20/2005 9:41 AM
Further, the state had to be contiguous with the dominion it was acceding to. So in the
case of Hyderabad state and Junagadh state, there was no shared border with Pakistan so
they had to accede to India.
Mansur
Back up this statement.
Appears to be fine on paper, but did it happen in 11/20/2005 5:38 PM
in the case of Punajbis of both sides to travel freely to both Punjabs

because pakistani and indian punjabs are not disputed territories

and bengalis on either side to freely travel to both bengals?

that is the problem of india and bengladesh so cant comment on it.

So why the special treatment to Kashmiris alone?

because kashmir is a disputed territory.

Kashmiris cannot ask for independence because it was not there in the partition plan.

thats why they are waging a freedom struggle because there fate was decided by only one
person which is against the so called demoCrazy india is so proud of.

A state had to either accede to India or to Pakistan. Every state's ruler made the decision
for his state to accede to either India or Pakistan.

sorry u are wrong. muslim majority areas to form pakistan. hindu majority to form india.

Kashmir's ruler decided to accede to India.

Junaid to complete the sentence put this at the end. AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE
Noor OF KASHMIR .

For British provinces, the division was made based on religion

WRONG the decision was made on majority.

Somehow, Pakistan did not accept the decision of the ruler of Princely state of Kashmir.

yes we do not accept one person deciding the fate of more than a million people who want
the exact opposite of what they want.

Further, the state had to be contiguous with the dominion it was acceding to. So in the
case of Hyderabad state and Junagadh state, there was no shared border with Pakistan so
they had to accede to India.

WRONG again. had this been the case Bangladesh would not have been east pakistan.

and u just said Every state's ruler made the decision for his state to accede to either
India or Pakistan

now why are u going back on your own statements? why one set of rules for one state and

10.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

different for the other.
11/20/2005 5:41 PM
This seems to be a real nice way to invite for talks.

atleast we are offering talks . India has never offered to talk because it has always thought
of pakistan as some thing very unimportant which can always be ignored and neglected.
Junaid
Noor
11/20/2005 6:36 PM
AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE PEOPLE OF KASHMIR .

Against their wishes at the time of Independence? What evidence do you have?
Mahim
Junaid 11/20/2005 8:50 PM
let kashmir be independent

Setting up a wrong precedent. Balochistanis will get a boost - If Kasmiris can do it so can
we.
ATJ
I'm sure some elements in India too will rise to the occasion. United States of Greater
Nagaland, for instance.

11/20/2005 8:50 PM
Against their wishes at the time of Independence? What evidence do you have?

and whats your evidence that it was according to there wishes?
Junaid
that piece of paper the raja signed?
Noor
11/20/2005 8:54 PM
and whats your evidence that it was according to there wishes?

a. the biggest political party representing the Kashmiris (the National Conference) was
staunchly pro-India

b. the 1947 invasion was launched mostly by pathans from the NWFP, not indigenous
Mahim Kashmiris.

c. even in 1965, Operation Gibraltar got very little support from the Kashmiri populace.
11/20/2005 9:27 PM
Further, the state had to be contiguous with the dominion it was acceding to. So in the case
of Hyderabad state and Junagadh state, there was no shared border with Pakistan so they
had to accede to India.

Back up this statement.

The British ruled India with two administrative systems. One was ‘Provinces’ and the other
‘Princely States’. About 60% of the Indian sub-continent's territory were Provinces and 40%
were Princely States. Provinces were British territories completely under British control.
Princely States were states in British India with local ruler or king with honorary titles like
Maharaja, Raja, Maharana, Rana, Nizam, Badshah and other such titles meaning king or
ruler in different Indian languages. These rulers were subjected to the British Empire.
These two types of administrative systems were the result of the British East India
Company's attempt to annex the whole of Indian sub-continent and make it into a British
Ramakrish territory.
nan
Partition plan laid down that for british controlled provinces, the majority religion would be
the basis of partition. However, for the province of Bengal and Punjab, since they both had
large minority populations, they were divided between India and Pakistan.

For princely states, they had to acceed to either India or Pakistan based on the wishes of
its ruler.

Both the above would be subject to the condition that it shared a border with the dominion
with which it wanted to join.

10.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

So for all princely states, it was the ruler who decided to accede with either India or
Pakistan. Only for british controlled provinces, the rule of majority religion applied. Pakistan
did not respect the decision of the ruler of Princely state of Kashmir.

No princely state was allowed to choose independence i.e becoming a separate country,
the ruler of each state had to either join India or Pakistan.
11/20/2005 9:46 PM
If your goal was to bring India to the tables, well we are there - so why don't you guys stop
it now.

no the goal is not accomplished otherwise musharraf wont have been "pleaing" and
requesting indians to come and discuss the issue.

Else if your goal was to get back the whole Kashmir (or make it independent)

no that is not my goal. that is what the partition plan of 1947 stated. all muslim majority
areas to form pakistan and all hindu majority areas to form india.

- theres no use talking on the tables, right?
Junaid
Noor yes thats why we always keep the "other" option open incase you make up your mind that
kashmir is your internal problem.

@Sir fantom @crabby

that is the best solution. let kashmir be independent. or let the LoC be the permanent
international border.

i would go for the latter one. However kashmiri citizens on both sides should be allowed to
travel freely in both kashmirs.
11/20/2005 9:50 PM
>>because kashmir is a disputed territory<<

Dispute was created by Pakistan and not Kashmiris. As I told earlier, Pakistan is always
comparing itself to India, and in that process, it was agitated that Kashmir did not accede
with itself, and rather chose to accede with India. In 1989, the Mujahideen terrorists who
had been fighting in Afghanistan against USSR were left jobless after the war ended.

They were then infused into Kashmir by Pakistan by telling a big lie that they were freedom
fighters.

Till today Pakistan is telling a big lie to its own people that Indian Army is torturing
Kashmiris in our side of Kashmir. Hahaha At least we are not like the crazy Mujahideen
in Pakistan who blow up their own people.

Indian army is there to protect our part of Kashmir from being snatched away by militants &
Ramakrish terrorists from NWFP like what happened to "Azad kashmir" in 1948. All the problems
nan
created to Kashmiris are because of Pakistanis who masquerade as freedom fighters in
Kashmir. In trying to fight them, problems are created for Kashmiri people. Kashmiris have
no interest whether they are Azad or not, they just want a peaceful society where everyone
follows the policy of "live and let live".

Till Pakistanis stop believing in the lies (that Kashmiris are tortured by India) which their
mullahs tell, Kashmir can never hope to have lasting peace. India will never allow Kashmir
to fall into Mullah hands like what happens in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Kashmir will be
secular and democratic only in Indian hands.
Ramakrishnan 11/20/2005 10:06 PM
Heh. Have you ever talked to a Kashmiri? Inevitably all the Muslim Kashmiris I've bumped
into in the U.S. tend to want:
i) preferably complete independence
ii) failing which a merger with pk

Mansur I'll admit that my limited interaction might not be completely indicative of the actual
situation, but I doubt you have any better personal experiences to speak from.

10.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

ps: I didn't ask for your ramblings on what you think the partition plan was. I asked you to
back it up with proof that those requirements were laid down in the plan.
11/20/2005 10:27 PM
the biggest political party representing the Kashmiris (the National Conference) was
staunchly pro-India

where was this party when the hindu raja was signing the document of accession?
Junaid
Noor why did Nehru not ask the opinion of this party rather then asking the raja to sign?
11/20/2005 10:30 PM
@ram

For princely states, they had to acceed to either India or Pakistan based on the wishes of
its ruler

exactly read again your own statement. it says ACCORDING TO THE WISHES OF THE
Junaid RULER.
Noor
and because it was not according to the wishes of the people thats why it is a disputed
territory.
11/20/2005 10:33 PM
All the problems created to Kashmiris are because of Pakistanis who masquerade as
freedom fighters in Kashmir

no the problem is created by indians like u who give more importance to the signatures of a
hindu raja then to the opinion of the public.

Junaid reason being that you know very well that the kashmiris will atleast not want to be part of
Noor india.

ironically you taunt us about demoCrazy where as you yourself trash it with the help of a
signature.
11/21/2005 12:02 AM
I asked you to back it up with proof that those requirements were laid down in the plan.

Show me a copy of the plan on the internet and I will tell you where the rules are contained.
Otherwise you are free to get a copy offline and read the plan for yourself.

exactly read again your own statement. it says ACCORDING TO THE WISHES OF THE
RULER.

and because it was not according to the wishes of the people thats why it is a disputed
territory.

The people did not say "we want to join Pakistan" or "we want independence". You are
wrongly assuming that all muslim dominated areas automatically wanted to join Pakistan. If
that were so, India wouldnt be having a muslim population higher than the entire population
Ramakrish of Pakistan. It was the Maharaja of Kashmir who asked for independence till the end (which
nan was not an option available to him). Then when militants from NWFP started raiding
Kashmir to force him to accede to Pakistan, he conveyed his decision to acceed to India,
based on which, Indian Army was moved into Kashmir.

British India had more than 500 princely states, big and small, and in all those princely
states it was the ruler who decided, not the people. Only in british provinces, it was decided
on majority basis. Kashmir was also a princely state and the ruler's decision was final. It is
all there in the partition plan, if you get a copy, read it.

Dont blindly believe what Mullas tell you, go to the source and read it.
topic: Pakistan's plea to India

Showing -2-10 of 76 first | < previous | next > | last
11/21/2005 12:09 AM
where was this party when the hindu raja was signing the document of accession?

why did Nehru not ask the opinion of this party rather then asking the raja to sign?

10.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Mahim
I fail to understand what you are trying to say here. The Partition Plan required that
the ruler of the princely state sign the Istrument of Accession. This was not
according to the whims of Nehru or of the Indian Government, but a legal agreement
reached between all the parties, including the people who were then authorized to
speak for Pakistan.

That the National Conference was staunchly pro-India only added to the moral
weight of Hari Singh's decision; it did nothing to change the ultimate legality of the
Instrument of Accession as signed by him.
11/21/2005 1:57 AM
reason being that you know very well that the kashmiris will atleast not want to
be part of india.

*All* Kashmiris?
Vikram
Including the Hindus and Sikhs who've been massacred and forced to become
refugees by Muslims?
11/21/2005 2:36 AM
You are wrongly assuming that all muslim dominated areas automatically wanted to
join Pakistan.

if u are willing to accept that the hindu majority areas of Hyderabad and Junagadh
wanted to join pakistan then i am also willing to accept that the muslim majority area
Junaid of kashmir wanted to join india.
Noor
@vikram

no i meant the 70% population of 14th august 1947
11/21/2005 2:52 AM
The people did not say "we want to join Pakistan" or "we want independence".

they also didnt say we want to join india.
Junaid
Noor rather they have never been asked about it.
11/21/2005 3:04 AM
and because it was not according to the wishes of the people thats why it is a
disputed territory.

Was the creation of Pakistan according to the wishes of the people of India?
Should we then declare all of Pakistan a disputed territory by the same logic?
Yet again, Baluchistan acceded to Pakistan and by several accounts after coercion.
Bhaskar Were the wishes of the Baluchi's taken into account? Should we then declare
Baluchistan a disputed territory too?

I think we must. High time.
11/21/2005 5:08 AM
@vikram

no i meant the 70% population of 14th august 1947

No you didn't.

Your tense clearly shows that you meant the present population of Kashmir NOT
Vikram that of 14th August 1947.

So your theory that *all* Kashmiris want independence of to accede to Pak is
wrong..seing as they've effectively disenfranchised and murdered all those who
opposed that point of view.

10.7
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

11/21/2005 8:16 AM
Stand of India and its people has been, Kashmir is its integral part and no issue at
all. Thanks that they now consider it to be a dispute. Now they put a precondition
that it would be solved after the secessions of the terrorist activities by Pakistan. I
see this to be a positive change. They will come out of this dream too that Pakistan
is behind the acts of terrorism.

Bhaskar Bhutto was not there in 1950.

International court of justice

The Shimla Agreement merely refers to "peaceful means" to settle disputes but
does not in any manner modify the specific rules governing recourse to any such
means.

The Court, while declining to entertain jurisdiction, impresses upon the parties to
settle their disputes pacifically through the Shimla Agreement and the Lahore
Declaration of February 21, 1999.
Syed
While "terrorism" and "Jammu and Kashmir" may be linked in real-politick to the
Atlantique incident, in "international law" the Indian and Pakistani ad hoc judges had
no logic to connect the same to the case, save to embarrass the opposite party.

The case yet again exposes the lacunae in the UN System whereby a State can
evade the process of legal adjudication and jurisdiction of the World Court rests on
the consent of the allegedly errant State. Pakistan cannot be faulted for approaching
the World Court for reparations. Unfortunately, international justice is as cold as the
climes where it is dispensed. International law must move forward and interpret
treaties in a manner to claim space for the law court, if the alternative is the
battlefield. I wish we had consented to judicial determination by the ICJ under the
Shimla Agreement. Of course, the World Court would also have to simultaneously
try Pakistan's dastardly role in the Kargil incident.
11/21/2005 11:06 AM
Bhutto was not there in 1950.

Read the article again carefully and make sure you understand what it is trying to
Bhaskar say this time.
11/21/2005 11:12 AM
Thanks that they now consider it to be a dispute.

Are you implying that India officially considers Kashmir to be disputed territory in
which case can you back this up?

Bhaskar
They will come out of this dream too that Pakistan is behind the acts of terrorism.

Still living in outright denial that Pakistan is behind acts of terrorism?
11/21/2005 11:18 AM
The Court, while declining to entertain jurisdiction, impresses upon the parties to
settle their disputes pacifically through the Shimla Agreement and the Lahore
Declaration of February 21, 1999.

It's nice that you quote the International Court of Justice. Pakistan has specifically
Bhaskar violated the various agreements through its Kargil adventure and through its
continued promotion of cross border terrorism. Before preaching any further, how do
you explain and account for Pakistan's actions?

11/22/2005 1:17 AM
Some guy puts a gun on my head and says "I do not want to put this gun on your head;
please agree to what I say, so that I can remove this gun; if you dont agree to my
proposition, lets keep discussing until you agree to what I say; I humbly request you to
agree to what I say and thus help me in removing the gun from your head"

The Pakistan attitude of talking about "discussing" Kasimir and supporting terrorism at the
Surya
same time is no different from the above mentioned situation

10.8
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

@ Bhasker 11/22/2005 1:36 AM
.

“Bhutto …… 1950”; ok you score one point here. I had problem with the net that day and
could not open the link by Ekta Kapoor to “star parivar” you posted earlier.

My point was that everyone except the Indians considers Jammu and Kashmir a dispute.
For a situation like this a saying in Urdu goes “kuttay ki dum tayrhi”. (explanation of the
saying; keep the tail of a dog in a straight tube, no matter how long you keep it there the
moment the tail is out of the tube it will still be in a bent).

Lahore declaration: -----Reiterating the determination of both countries to implementing the
Simla Agreement in letter and spirit; -----Shall intensify their efforts to resolve all issues,
including the issue of Jammu and Kashmir. Your leaders put a signature on these clauses,
and back-out when facing the general public and feed it with lies. What a pitiful credibility
of you successive leaders and their moral bankruptcy.
Syed
The other point I wanted to highlight is that your cries of cross border terror are not taken
very seriously by many. When a bomb kills your soldiers it is a win point for the Kashmir
freedom fighters. When a bomb kills poor civilians it is wrong weakens the cause of the
freedom struggle. It is hard to accept that any movement would want to weaken its own
stand.

The latest stand of the Indian government on the Kashmir issue is that it can take up the
issue after the secession of the cross-border terrorism. Terrorism suits India, to delay the
issue further; I therefore conclude that all the terrorist activities resulting in the loss to
civilian life are sponsored by Indian government.
Continued…….. 11/22/2005 1:37 AM
.
Another point to be highlited is that there are lacunae in the UN System. That’s what the
court says: State can evade the process of legal adjudication and jurisdiction of the World
Court rests on the consent of the allegedly errant State that refers to India. Pakistan
cannot be faulted for approaching the World Court for reparations. Unfortunately,
international justice is as cold as the climes where it is dispensed. The international court
of justice is sympathetic to the cause of Pakistan vis-à-vis Kashmir.

You people are jubilant of taking advantage of the UN lacunae. But that evasive attitude of
Syed India invites the wrath of the common Kashmir people. It has universally been accepted
that no freedom struggle can survive unless it has indigenous support. If you don’t solve
the issue of Kashmir you will continue having bad dreams of terrorism and will spend
many more restless nights.
11/22/2005 2:07 AM
It has universally been accepted that no freedom struggle can survive unless it has
indigenous support.

LOL. Have you understood what you have written?
Bhaskar
11/22/2005 2:26 AM
It has universally been accepted that no freedom struggle can survive unless it has
indigenous support.

Okay, I admit that I am ignorant whether Kashmiri people support or reject the militancy in
Kashmir. But this statement of yours, Mr. Jaffer, is hardly any convincing argument that
they are indeed in favour of it.

The violence in Israel is a case in point. Palestinian militants sneak into Israeli cities and
blow themselves up all the time. Should we, from that fact alone, deduce that they have
Gurinder the support of the people in those cities? Should we also presume that the men who
detonated bombs in New Delhi last month were in agreement with the wishes of the
majority of the Delhiites?

Now I fully respect your beliefs behind calling the militancy (which is a neutral term)
'freedom struggle'. I cannot contest that because I am not aware of the Kashmiri reality.
What I do wish to say is that just because you believe it to be a struggle for freedom and
because it's been going on for quite a while now, it cannot be concluded that the militants
indeed have the support of the Kashmiri public.

10.9
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

I not defending the position of the Indian government here; I'm just pointing out this
misplaced reasoning one gets to hear all too often from the Pakistanis.
11/22/2005 4:22 AM
If u are willing to accept that the hindu majority areas of Hyderabad and Junagadh wanted
to join pakistan then i am also willing to accept that the muslim majority area of kashmir
wanted to join india.

Hyderabad and Junagadh were princely states ruled by muslim rulers. They wanted their
states to join Pakistan, and that would have been a valid claim, but it was not valid
because they were surrounded by India on all sides and had no common border with
Pakistani territory. The decision of the rulers would be binding if the princely state was
"contiguous" with the country which it wanted to join. Hindu majority did not matter.
Besides India is not a "Hindu Republic". There is as much scope for Muslims to live
peacefully as there is for Hindus or for Christians or Buddhists or Parsees or Sikhs or
Jains. India is not by default pro-hindu or anti-muslim.

they also didnt say we want to join india.

They did not say anything, and their opinion was not sought. So you must agree that your
Govt has all along misled you about so called "wishes of Kashmiris to join Pakistan or stay
independent", because such an option was given only to people living in the provinces,
Ramakris not to people in any Princely State.
hnan
When a bomb kills poor civilians it is wrong weakens the cause of the freedom struggle. It
is hard to accept that any movement would want to weaken its own stand.

If we were killing Kashmiris, do you think we would be having them for nearly 60 years?
How long do you think it takes to kill people in one's own land? Did Hitler take 60 years to
kill most of the jews?

Think for yourself, dont blindly believe in Mulla's words of hate.

The killing is by the Mujahideen, who obviously cannot kill everyone due to the presence
of Indian Army, so they do these things on the sly once in a while through acts of
cowardice like suicide-bombing.
11/22/2005 4:41 AM
@Gurinder

Okay, I admit that I am ignorant ……… any convincing argument that they are indeed in
favour of it.

None of us can claim to be ignorant or knowledgeable unless we determine the will of the
Kashmir people through the mechanisms determined by the United Nations Resolution
adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January 1957 which
states that:

Reminding the Governments and authorities concerned of the principle embodied in its
resolutions of 21 April 1948 (S/726), 3 June 1948 , 14 March 1950 (S/1469) and 30 March
1951 (S/2017/Rev. 1), and the United Nations Commission for India and Pakistan
resolutions of 13 August 1948 (S/1100, para. 75) and 5 January 1949 (S/1196, para. 15),
that the final disposition of that State of Jammu and Kashmir will be made in accordance
Syed with the will of the people expressed through the democratic method of a free and
impartial plebiscite conducted under the auspices of the United Nations,

1. Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have taken
or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the entire State or
any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any such action by the
Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in accordance with the above
principles;

10.10
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

11/22/2005 4:42 AM
Continued…….

Please note that there is no ambiguity and as per Kofi Annan this is a valid resolution.
The resolution clearly states that the matter has to be determined by the will of the
Kashmiri people through a plebiscite conducted by the UN itself. Please also note that the
matter of accession of the state of Jammu & Kashmir carried out by the All Jammu &
Kashmir National Conference is invalid, which puts null and void the instrument of
accession by the Maharaja. The clause is very strict and says any action that Assembly
may have taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and
affiliation of the entire State or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned
Syed in support of any such action by the Assembly, would not constitute a disposition
of the State in accordance with the above principles; . This disowns all the future
actions by the state assembly and the Indian Government except the plebiscite. It is the
apprehension of the Indian government that it has no case which compels it towards the
delaying tactics. I Will continue later on with the reply to Gurinder Post
LOL @ plebiscite 11/22/2005 7:35 AM
Any discussion on terrorism by the part of Pakistan is ultimately led by Syed to the UN
Resolutions and the plebiscite issue.

Syed will never bring himself to answer why Pakistan did not implement the Jan 1948 UN
Bhaskar Resolutions on the subject when it was required of them to take the first step .......
11/22/2005 8:42 AM
Any discussion on terrorism by the part of Pakistan is ultimately led by Syed to the UN
Resolutions and the plebiscite issue.

Heh. And any discussion to solve the Kashmir dispute is ultimately led by you and your
type to "terrorism".

Mansur Syed will never bring himself to answer why Pakistan did not implement the Jan 1948 UN
Resolutions on the subject when it was required of them to take the first step .......

It's rather simple. Pakistan didn't trust India to keep it's end of the bargain. Has always
sought assurances in that regard. With hindsight, the fears were totally justified.

11/22/2005 9:08 AM
well if its a freedom struggle there are two cases :

1. Pakistan let the Kashmiris have their freedom struggle and stop meddling. Since
Pakistan says India was wrong in its involvement wiht east Pakistan, why are they doing
the same wrong thing themselves. Isn't that double standards?

2. Else, Pakistan may say they wanna help the Kashmiri freedom struggle. In that case,
why dont they get out of POK/Azad Kashmir instead of putting Pakistani stooge
administrators there. I dont think Pakistan recognizes POK as a seperate nation. Now
Ardy
this again reeks of double standards.

Either way if Pakistans stand is of a freedom struggle there, it should at best be a
supporter instead of going out life and limb for Kashmir and it should not have double
standards regarding its position.
11/22/2005 12:25 PM
In 1947, the Maharaja of Kashmir wanted to establish his own independent state.

Sheikh Abdullah, who was the leader of the National Conference, the largest Muslim
party of Kashmir was against the Maharaja's demand of independence. Then even
before the Maharaja could make up his mind whether to accede to India or Pakistan,
militants from NWFP were sent into Kashmir to create widespread terror to force the
Maharaja to accede to Pakistan. They had occupied the area till the line of control. The
Maharajah then decided to accede to India, and this decision was welcomed by the
leader of National Conference, Sheikh Abdullah. This attitude of the majority muslim
Ramakrish party of Kashmir further added salt to Pakistan's wounds, so it started spreading lies that
nan the accession was against the wishes of Kashmiris.

The Indian Army was then immediately airlifted to Srinagar and effectively stopped the
intruding militants from gaining further ground. Although there were Indian leaders who

10.11
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

asked Nehru to order the Indian Army to drive back the militants and regain the lost
territories of Kashmir, Nehru decided to take the issue to the United Nations.

The United Nations ruled that a free and fair plebiscite should be held under Indian
supervision after Pakistan handed back the part of Kashmir under its occupation.
Pakistan did not want to hand over the "Azad Kashmir" to India, so India said there was
no possibility of a free and fair plebiscite until Azad Kashmir was handed over by
Pakistan.

This is where it stands now. Pakistan has no locus standi on Kashmir. In the pretext of
supporting Kashmiris, the Mujahideen are actually killing Kashmiris and putting the
blame on Indian Army.

Pakistanis are all very happy to listen to words of Mullas without seeing with their own
eyes.
Maharajah's letter to Mountbatten dt. 26 Oct 1947 11/22/2005 12:32 PM
Text of letter dated October 26, 1947 from Sri Hari Singh, the Maharaja of Jammu and
Kashmir to Lord Mountbatten the Governor-General of India.

My dear Lord Mountbatten,

I have to inform your Excellency that a grave emergency has arisen in my State and
request immediate assistance of your Government.

As your Excellency is aware the State of Jammu and Kashmir has not acceded to the
Dominion of India or to Pakistan. Geographically my State is contiguous to both the
Dominions. It has vital economical end cultural links with both of them. Besides my State
has a common boundary with the Soviet Republic and China. In their external relations
and Dominion of India and Pakistan cannot ignore this fact.

I wanted to take time to decide to which Dominion I should accede, or whether it is not in
the best interests of both the Dominions and my State to stand independent, of course
with friendly and cordial relations with both.
Ramakrish
nan I accordingly approached the Dominions of India and Pakistan to enter into Standstill
Agreement with my State. The Pakistan Government accepted this Agreement. The
Dominion of India desired further discussions with representatives of my Government. l
could not arrange this in view of the developments indicated below. In fact the Pakistan
Government are operating Post and Telegraph system inside the State.

Though we have got a Standstill Agreement with the Pakistan Government permitted
steady and increasing strangulation of supplies like food, salt and petrol to my State.

Afridis, soldiers in plain clothes, and desperadoes with modern weapons have been
allowed to infliter into the State at first in Poonch and then in Sialkot and finally in mass
area adjoining Hazara District on the Ramkot side.
continued 11/22/2005 12:33 PM
The result has been that the limited number of troops at the disposal of the State had to
be dispersed and thus had to face the enemy at the several points simultaneously, that it
has become difficult to stop the wanton destruction of life and property and looting. The
Mohara power-house which supplies the electric current to the whole of Srinagar has
been burnt. The number of women who have been kidnapped and raped and makes my
heart bleed. The wild forces thus let loose on the State are marching on with the aim of
capturing Srinagar, the summer Capital of my Government, as first step to over running
the whole State.

The mass infiltration tribesman drawn from the distant areas of the North-West Frontier
coming regularly in motor trucks using Mansehra-Muzaffarabad Road and fully armed
Ramakrish with up-to-date weapons cannot possibly be done without the knowing of the Provincial
nan Government of the North-West Frontier Province and the Government of Pakistan. In
spite of repeated requests made by my Government no attempt has been made to check
these raiders or stop them from coming to my State. The Pakistan Radio even put out a
story that a Provisional Government has been set up in Kashmir. The people of my State
both the Muslims generally have taken no part at all.

With the conditions obtaining at present in my State and to great emergency of the

10.12
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

situation as it exists, I hay" no option but to ask for help from the Indian Dominion.
Naturally they cannot send the help asked for by me without my State acceding to the
Domination of India. I have accordingly decided to do so and I attach the Instrument of
Accession for; acceptance by your Government. The other alternative is to leave my
State and my people to fee-booters. On this basis no civilized Government can exist or
be maintained. The alternative I will never allow to happen as long as I am Ruler of the
State and I have life to defend my country.
11/22/2005 12:34 PM
I may also inform your Excellency's Government that it is my intention at once to set up
an interim Government and ask Shaikh Abdullah to carry the responsibilities in this
emergency with my Prime Minister.

If my State has to be saved immediate assistance must be available at Srinagar. Mr.
Menon is fully aware of the situation and he will explain to you, if further explanation is
needed.

Ramakrish In haste and with kindest regards.
nan
Yours Sincerely
Hari Singh
The Palace, Jammu
26th October, 1947
11/22/2005 12:44 PM
This shows the Maharajah acted in the best interests of his people and to protect
his state from incursions by tribals, vandals and militants sent in by Pakistan Govt
(who were already operating Post and Telegraph services inside Kashmir) despite
agreeing to a stand-still agreement.

So you can see the truth for yourselves. In contrast, Indian Army stepped into
Kashmir only after the instrument of accession was signed by the Maharaja and
Ramakrish accepted by the leaders of the dominant Muslim party of Kashmir. Also it was the
nan Indian Govt which took the issue to UN, and it was Pakistan which did not want to
obey UN rulings and handover Azad Kashmir back to India to hold free and fair
plebiscite.
11/22/2005 4:58 PM
It's rather simple. Pakistan didn't trust India to keep it's end of the bargain. Has always
sought assurances in that regard. With hindsight, the fears were totally justified.

Assurances from whom and of what nature?

Mahim So do we agree that not implementing the plebiscite resolution was because of Pakistani
intransigence, whatever the reason for it may have been?
11/22/2005 5:40 PM

Assurances from whom and of what nature?

India? UN? Anything that really guaranteed that India would keep it's end of the bargain.

So do we agree that not implementing the plebiscite resolution was because of Pakistani
Mansur intransigence, whatever the reason for it may have been?

No. Pakistan wasn't intransigent. It's very acceptable to gauge whether an agreement
will be fulfilled by the other party. The problem is with the attitude of those who aren't
willing now and never did intend to enforce the plebiscite.
11/22/2005 6:15 PM
I think the fundamental problem is the lack of trust. Pakistan always saw the allotment of
Gurdaspur district to India as a sign that India always had evil intentions towards
Kashmir.
Mansur
11/22/2005 9:23 PM
specially after india tried to block the terribly needed funds of a newly born nation for the
sole purpose of crippling it perhaps forcing it to merge it back into it, pakistan didnt have
enough reasons to trust india.
Junaid

10.13
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Noor thanks to Gandhi jee that pakistan received those terribly needed funds and later on he
was murdered for the same "sin".

11/22/2005 9:25 PM
Continued, reply to Gurinder

Palestine militants: the whole of the movement has undergone evolutionary changes over
the years, starting from simple protest marches through the streets, to stone throwing, to
plane hijacking and keeping hostages, to sniper activities, to suicide bombings etc. When
you don’t agree to the genuine demands of people they protest and you can’t stop them
and you can’t force them to adopt the way which suites you.

When you block one method of protest, people resort to protest in a new form. Yasir
Arafat was also termed as terrorist until brought by Bhutto to attend international forums
where his militant activities were converted to recognized freedom struggle. A few
considered him terrorist even today, this depends on which side of the divide you are.
When Arafat opted for milder protests radicals from his own ranks started disassociating
themselves from him.
Syed
If you don’t resolve the issues in time the movements pass-on into the hands of the lower
tiers of leadership, the back benchers and radicals grab the opportunity for their game.
Yasir Arafat was an educated and enlightened person, so were his colleagues, Muslim
and non-Muslims alike. When he appeared to some that he is not in full control, another
school of thought emerged. This was lead by mullahs. It was Uncle Sam who
strengthened mullah all over the world for the specific purpose of fighting communism.
The present situation is the fallout of the Uncle Sam’s policies of the last 60 years.
Mullahs, may they be of any religion, don’t take into account the logic; their main source
of thought is faith.
11/22/2005 9:25 PM
Continued….

Killings, wars and suicides are not the activities of rational people it is an act of
desperation. Detonating devices on public places was I think started by Sin Fein in
Ireland for the purpose of terrorizing general public. Killing unconcerned and general
public is a barbaric act. I don’t think people committing suicides to kill common people
invite any sympathy for themselves or their cause from any quarter.

Any movement which cannot differentiate between the actual enemy and the general
public that could be your prospective sympathizer, to me is not in the hands of genuine
leadership. When you are struggling for a noble cause like freedom of your fellow citizens
your aim should be to target your enemy only and during the struggle your aim should
Syed also be to gain sympathies of even the common public of your opposite camp. You
should attack the specific and carefully selected military targets only.

Delhi massacre; I fail to understand could be a thought out plan of some one who loves
Kashmiri cause. It goes exactly opposite to what the Kashmir cause is; in fact it harms
the cause. This is why I am convinced that the Delhi incident and other incidents of its
like could be the plan of the enemies of the Kashmir cause. Who is the biggest enemy of
the Kashmir freedom movement?
11/22/2005 9:26 PM
Continued….

These are my views on the subject – I may be wrong but that is what I firmly believe. Like
you I also don’t support my government. I try to stick to what the documents signed by
the successive governments of the two countries say. I consider that resolution 122 of 24
January 1957 is the key document on the UN record which can solve the Kashmir issue.
It was unanimously supported by all the nations of the world.
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/131/29/IMG/NR013129.pdf?Open
Element
Syed These resolutions and agreements are not my personal views or press statements by
some leaders or just theories. We are not at fault if the Indian leaders signed those
documents and back out now. This post should answer all the points raised by Ardy,
Ramakrishnan, Mahim,. Mine or your views don’t matter in the international relations.

Go through all the documents namely the UN resolutions Tashkent Declaration, Simla

10.14
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Agreement, and Lahore Accord. All these documents and other documents pertaining to
Kashmir all over the world take Kashmir as disputed territory, and suggest that the matter
should be solved peacefully. No document accuses Pakistan of backing out and not
withdrawing its troops.

As late as this week our General has offered to make Kashmir demilitarized territory. As
late as today on the objection of Lord Nazeer a Kashmiri in the House of Lords, the
British parliament clarifies that the Kashmir freedom struggle will not be taken in the
purview of international terrorism, this was on the local news, I just saw; yet to find a link.
11/22/2005 9:55 PM
It's rather simple. Pakistan didn't trust India to keep it's end of the bargain. Has always
sought assurances in that regard. With hindsight, the fears were totally justified.

If Pakistan didnt trust India, it shouldnt have signed the 48 resolutions for the plebiscite
(that asked pakistan to remove its army first). as simple as that.
Manuel
মানুেয়ল
Dont you think being a signatory to the agreement, and then reneging on its stand was
insincere/?
Syed 11/22/2005 9:59 PM
Why don't you go read the UN resolutions before you keep shooting off here about them?

Resolution 51 clearly states:

1. Pakistan should withdraw its Army and its people from PoK

2. *Then*, India should leave enough military and civil administration in Kashmir to
maintain law and order and the smooth administration of affairs, and withdraw all excess
forces.

3. A plebiscite should then be held, under the authority of the UN, with the help of the
Indian government in carrying out the low-level administrative and security
responsibilities.

All the future resolutions on the matter have basically affirmed what 51 had to say.

This clearly tells me:

1. The UN recognizes Kashmir as legally belonging to India (hence, Pakistan should
withdraw and India should carry out the security and administrative responsibilites), even
Mahim though, since self-determination in general is a nice concept, we should let the Kashmiris
do it.

2. The first step to holding a plebisicite was clearly that Pakistan should withdraw.

Coming to Mansur's point: Pakistan does not trust India? I may be mistaken here, but it
was Pakistan which sent well-armed tribals and irregular soldiers into Kashmir in 1947,
even though it had a Standstill Agreement with Kashmir, and the Maharaja had every
legal right to take his time making a decision. It was Pakistan who launched Operation
Gibraltar in 1965. And it was Pakistan again who launched Kargil in 1999, in the
immediate shadow of the Lahore Declaration. And now you say you will not implement
the UN resolutions because *you* don't trust *us*, but will continue lecturing us about
them? And what should we do, trust the Architect of Kargil and take up his offers for
peace?

Stop the high-minded rhetoric man. Pakistan launched a naked land grab in 1947, and
has since held on to that land. If there is any moral high ground in this situation, it
certainly does not belong to Pakistan.
11/22/2005 10:02 PM
why is has one document got more weightage for you and the other one less.

what about the partition plan.

that was also a document which was accepted by all parties.
Junaid Noor
what about that.

10.15
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

the kashmir issue is a direct result of india not going according to the partition plan.

and now dont tell me kashmiri muslims wanted to side with india.

No hindu would like to side with pakistan and yet muslims would like to side with india.
Syed 11/22/2005 10:17 PM
Oh yeah, I forgot your most idiotic point of all.

Terrorist attacks in Delhi and elsewhere would, in your estimation, hurt the cause of the
people blamed for them, hence they could not have carried them out. Since hurting the
cause of those people would most benefit the Indian Government, hence the GoI must
have planned and executed them. QED, right?

So let us extend this reasoning. 9/11 was carried out by the Americans (of course!), the
Israeli suicide bombings were carried out by Mossad, the Beslan school seige was
Mahim carried out by the FSB, the bombings in Indonesia, Turkey, Morocco, Jordan etc. etc.
were carried out by the CIA (or, take your pick: Mossad, the Elders of Zion, Dick Cheney
himself), the victims of Gujarat killed themselves, Musharraf regularly stages his own
assassination attempts, and so on and so forth.

The world sure becomes a much more interesting place when one starts thinking like
you.
11/22/2005 10:47 PM
Grrr, I typed a long response and then my browser crashed. I will try to briefly repeat.

India is not a Hindu country. Pakistan is and always has been a Muslim country, even
though Jinnah might have briefly wanted to believe otherwise. There were and there are
a very significant number of Muslims in India, who do reasonably well for themselves.
And religion is not a be-all and end-all of human existence, as evidenced by your inability
to keep Pakistan united. So shove it about no Muslims wanting to stay in India.

About the Partition Plan, you keep harping on it, even though others have said before
what it entailed for the Princely States. I will repeat; pay careful attention. The rulers of
these states had the right to choose India, Pakistan or Independence, keeping in mind
gerographic contiguity, the demographics of the state, and the wishes of the
people. Note: no mention of Muslim majority areas automatically going to Pakistan.
Mahim
As for the wishes of the Kashmiris in 1947 and thereafter, you assert that simply being
Muslim, they had to side with Pakistan. I beg to differ, based on the following evidence:
that the largest and most influential Muslim political party in the state at the time was
staunchly pro-India, that the conflict in 1947 was carried out mostly by tribals shipped in
from the NWFP and Pakistani Army irregulars, and that as late as 1965, Pakistan's large
scale infiltration in Operation Gibraltar was a spectacular failure due to lack of local
support.

Now, if you don't have anything to support your position other than the supposed desire
of all Muslims to live in one country, it is futile to continue this discussion.
11/22/2005 11:13 PM
Pakistan always saw the allotment of Gurdaspur district to India as a sign that India
always had evil intentions towards Kashmir.

specially after india tried to block the terribly needed funds of a newly born nation for the
sole purpose of crippling it perhaps forcing it to merge it back into it, pakistan didnt have
enough reasons to trust india.

thanks to Gandhi jee that pakistan received those terribly needed funds and later on he
was murdered for the same "sin".

Ramakrishn So? Kashmir never belonged to Pakistan. Why does Pakistan need to save Kashmir
an when the majority Muslim Party of Kashmir (which represents the wishes of Kashmiri
Muslims) wanted Kashmir to join with India?

Gandhi's insistence that Pakistani dues be paid immediately in full was difficult for India
because India had not received its war claims from Britain for participating in WW2, so
India was short of cash. But still, it was paid.

10.16
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Delhi massacre; I fail to understand could be a thought out plan of some one who loves
Kashmiri cause.

Kashmiris have nothing to do with this. It is the work of Islamic radicals, whether from
within India or from Pakistan.

Mine or your views don’t matter in the international relations.

Exactly, so let us not go by opinions, but by facts. Facts clearly spell out that Maharajah
did not make up his mind about either India or Pakistan. He was demanding
independence for Kashmir. It was the National Conference led by Sheikh Abdullh which
opposed the Maharajah's claim for independence. When there was widespread looting,
rape and arson by the Pathans from NWFP in Kashmir, Maharajah decided to accede to
India and invited Indian Army to stop the destruction of life and property by Pathans from
NWFP.

After accession to India, elections were held in Indian Kashmir and Sheikh Abdullah won
unopposed in all districts. This confirms that his decision to side with India was accepted
by all Kashmiris.
11/22/2005 11:24 PM
what about the partition plan.

that was also a document which was accepted by all parties.

what about that.

the kashmir issue is a direct result of india not going according to the partition plan.

The partition plan said that the rulers of all 563 princely states had the option either to
join Pakistan or India provided the state was contiguous to the dominion which it wanted
to join. Kashmir (both people and ruler) wanted to join India. Pakistani Pathan militants
raided Kashmir and destroyed life and property of Kashmiris in 1947-48.
Ramakrishn
an and now dont tell me kashmiri muslims wanted to side with india.

Do you have a problem accepting truth and facts? It is a fact that the NC (largest party
representing Muslims in Kashmir) wanted to go with India, and not with Pakistan.

No hindu would like to side with pakistan and yet muslims would like to side with india.

Yes sir, that is because we are not a Hindu country, whereas you are a Muslim country.

11/22/2005 11:33 PM
Valid question Manuel. However the precondition to plebiscite wasn't the only part to the
UN resolutions. There were other stipulations that we couldn't agree on subsequently:

...the Government of India agrees to begin to withdraw the bulk of their forces from the
State in stages to be agreed upon with the Commission.

I've found this link very useful in explaining how things worked out in the years following
the resolutions.

Based on these discussions, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 98, in
December 1952. (See Appendix III) The UNSC Resolution, regarding demilitarisation
Mansur issue clarified that: (Article 4) ‘the Governments of India and Pakistan to enter into
immediate negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations representative for India
and Pakistan in order to reach agreement on the specific number of forces to remain on
each side of the cease-fire line at the end of the period of demilitarisation, this number to
be between 3,000 and 6,000 armed forces remaining on the Pakistan side of the cease-
fire line and between 12,000 and 18,000 armed forces remaining on the India side of the
cease-fire line.’ Though during the discussions Pakistan’s representative to the UN, Mr.
Zafrulla Khan, pointed out that the number of forces proposed was not fair, yet he said
that Pakistan ‘is prepared to go forward on the basis of this resolution.’72 The Indian
representative, Mrs. Pandit, in her speech, however, categorically said, ‘I should like to
repeat that we reject the proposal in it and we are not prepared to enter into any talks on

10.17
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

the basis suggested.’73
11/22/2005 11:34 PM
Sir Owen Dixon, the UN mediator, in his report submitted in 1950, wrote: ‘In the end I
became convinced that India’s agreement would never be obtained to demilitarisation in
any such form, or to provisions governing the period of plebiscite of any such character,
Mansur as would in my opinion, permit of the plebiscite being conducted in conditions sufficiently
guarding against intimidation and other forms of influence and abuse by which the
freedom and fairness of the plebiscite might be imperilled.74’
11/23/2005 12:17 AM
Jaffer Sir, I was just pointing out a logical flaw, nothing more. What I meant is that just
because violence, prolongued or otherwise, is on in any region, it cannot be concluded
that it has the support of the local population. You may call me nitpicky, but that's all I
Gurinder intended. I'm agnostic about the causes or the propriety of the militancy in either Kashmir
or Palestine, so I cannot argue about that.

11/23/2005 2:30 AM
Valid question Manuel. However the precondition to plebiscite wasn't the only part to the
UN resolutions. There were other stipulations that we couldn't agree on subsequently:

Quite clearly Pakistan reneged on its word and its obligations at the start point in 1948.
There is no excusing that.
If Pakistan had kept up its word THEN there is no reason for India not to have kept up its
word too, having already agreed to abide by the UN Resolution on the issue.
Your supposition under the circumstances are not valid, hindsight or otherwise.

Given this, the Paki establishment or its citizens have no real reason or justification to
harp on the plebiscite issue now in 2005.

Besides if the plebiscite is meant to give free voice to the people of Kashmir, that is being
done regularly and in a better forum by holding elections, which has more validity when
done over a long term than a random plebiscite. While on this, could you tell me , how
many elections have been held in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, particularly the Northern
Bhaskar Areas since 1948? LOL.

The UN was seen to be ineffective in resolving the issue, which is the reason why the
democratically elected representatives of both countries decided to sign the Shimla
Accord.
Then what is the point of repeatedly bringing up the UN Resolutions, as Syed is wont to
do selectively, when Pakis themselves refused to abide by the initial preconditions of the
first resolutions on the subject?
Smacks of insincerity all through.

And why shouldn't India talk of terrorism? Are you justifying terrorism being perpetrated
by Pakistan in principle...looks like that to me, else you would have no reason to object to
India speaking on the matter particularly when she's been affected by it now for at least
20 years.
11/23/2005 2:46 AM
@Mr.Gurinder I reciprocate with same honour and respect. I also thank you
for being considerate for the human sufferings. We all should satisfy ourselves and
should strive for a just solution of Kashmir. Terrorism will die its natural death when there
is no issue to fight, moving the dust under the carpet will not work.
Syed
11/23/2005 2:50 AM
@Mahim & Ramakrishnan

Below are the excerpts from the UN documents. Please read these carefully and if you
still believe that Kashmir is a part of India than who can help you.

Resolution 98 of 23 December 1952 [S/2883]
Clause 4. Urges the Governments of India and Pakistan to enter into immediate
negotiations under the auspices of the United Nations Representative for India and
Syed Pakistan in order to reach agreement on the specific number of forces to remain on each
side of the cease-fire line at the end of the period of demilitarization, this number to be
between 3,000 to 6,000 armed forces remaining on the Pakistan side of the cease-fire
line and between 12,000 and 18,000 armed forces remaining on the India side of the

10.18
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

cease-fire line…….

Resolution 122 adopted by the Security Council at its 765th meeting on 24 January
1957, concerning the India–Pakistan Question states:
Reaffirms the affirmation in its resolution of 30 March 1951 and declares that the
convening of a Constituent Assembly as recommended by the General Council of the ‘All
Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’ and any action that Assembly may have
taken or might attempt to take to determine the future shape and affiliation of the
entire State or any part thereof, or action by the parties concerned in support of any
such action by the Assembly, would not constitute a disposition of the State in
accordance with the above principles;

What a funny argument “The UN recognizes Kashmir as legally belonging to India” and
resolves the above
11/23/2005 2:52 AM
@Mahim & Ramakrishnan

The following shows how misleading, dishonest and deceiving sheikh Abdullah was with
the Kashmiri people.

At its 548th meeting, on 29 March 1951, the Council approved the text of a letter to be
sent by the President to the Governments of India and Pakistan, reading as follows:
“I have the honour to call your attention to the important principles regarding the India-
Pakistan question restated in the Security Council resolution of 30 march 1951 [resolution
91 (1951)]
“Members of the Security Council, at its 548th meeting held on 29 May 1951, have heard
with satisfaction the assurances of the representative of India that any constituent
assembly that may be established in Sirinagar is not intended to prejudice the issues
before the Security Council or to come in its way.
Syed “on the other hand, the two communications to me, as President of the Council, from the
representatives of Pakistan, set forth in documents S/2119 and S/2145, contain reports
which, if they are correct, indicate that steps are being taken by the Yuvaraja of Jammu
and Kashmir to convoke a constituent assembly, on function of which according to
Sheikh Abdullah, would be a decision on the future shape and affiliation of Kashmir”.
http://daccessdds.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/072/10/IMG/NR007210.pdf?Open
Element

With the track record of the Indian ruling junta one is justified in believing that the Delhi
killings could be their plot.
11/23/2005 3:56 AM
Below are the excerpts from the Simla Agreement signed by Indira and Bhutto on July 3,
1972. Since the pact does not outline the procedure for the solution so the countries
adhere to what the UN has to say. Simla agreement takes up the international border
and the line of control separately. The agreement does not take LOC as international
border between India and Pakistan, it is a temporary arrangement. The Kashmir is an
issue requiring a final settlement. I don’t understand why Bhasker always comes out with
pathetic arguments.

-------That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern
the relations between the two countries.
-------Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international
Syed border.
-------In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-fire of December
17, 1971, shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised position of
either side.
-------Both Governments agree that their respective heads will meet again at a mutually
convenient time in the future and that in the meanwhile the representatives of the two
sides will meet to discuss further ……………., a final settlement of Jammu and Kashmir
and the resumption of diplomatic relations.

10.19
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Community United Nations
http://www.orkut.com/CommMsgs.aspx?cmm=4608&tid=16313522&tim=1120752347&crt=3431230&na=3&
nid=

Topic: PLZ FOR GOD SAKE ITS TIME FOR PEACE

PLZ FOR GOD SAKE ITS TIME FOR PEACE 7/7/2005 4:05 PM
I am here to say somethings plz and i dont need comments neg or pos on it i need all of
u ppl out here to support peace and harmony among all nations religions....dont u think
that its enough now all this blood shed all this hatred all this u right i am wrong thing the
blaming game.....plzplz stop criticizing on who is right and who is not ur all are on
UNITED NATIONS forum and if i am not wrong the reason behind making UN was to
support peace not to support hatred of any kind....i am a pakistani i dont like hatred dont
like blood sheding dont like to see war and deaths again and again....i want to give my
futre generation a better place to live....but it seems no one in this world is ready to pay
MUHAMMAD the price everyone in here just want to oil the fumes of hatred more and more.....come
BASIT one everyone plz i think its enough now lets join our hands try to spread love try to create
love and peace among all religions all nations bcz only then we will be able to give ever
generation the place we didnt get......i dont want any negative and positive comments on
my topic just plz realize the urgency and need and support me in my effort i hope u will all
understand the thing which i realized.....EVERYONE ALWAYS BE HAPPY AND KEEP
SMILING..............
7/7/2005 6:01 PM
The UN hadn't the will to do anything about massive human rights violations around the
world. Since the UN's founding, how many genocides has the world seen?
James
The UN will not bring peace.
@james 7/8/2005 12:17 AM
So mr james it means that we the people of this world have no duties left to perform u
mean that we should lie down and wait for some revolution of peace to come in why dont
MUHAMMAD we become the pioneer of such act of courage and humanity?????????
BASIT
@ Muhammad 7/8/2005 12:19 AM
Do you denounce the recent attacks on London or support it like some other people
here?

Rosney
7/8/2005 12:31 AM
Is the attack the fault of the terrorists, or of Britain?
Brent
@rosney 7/8/2005 9:09 AM
I strongly denounce the attacks took place in London like the governement of Pakistan
did tooo....i belive this is not the way to get urself heard....killing innocent ppl anywhere is
a strong act of terrorism and ISlam never ever teached anything like this in any readings
at all.....but alas some fools are using name of Islam for the justification and its giving
MUHAMMAD more and more bad name to muslims and Islam...Plz everyone should realize now war
BASIT and such acts are not the answer anymore plz talk through such matters try to talk peace
not war plzplzplz everyone join hands together to make this world peaceful bcz if we dont
do it then trust me no one can
hmmm 7/8/2005 10:00 AM
Again ALqaida behind London blasts

MUHAMMAD
BASIT
7/8/2005 10:28 AM
Its not yet proved that Al Qaida is behind the London blast, is it?

Unknown

11.1
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

7/8/2005 10:36 AM
then who was behind the attacks??
US? Lolzzzzz
Kedar
for everyone plz read it 7/8/2005 1:24 PM
Prophet Muhammad observed that killing another human being is such a grevious act
that it falls into the category of major sins. He continued to say that whoever killed
someone from the 'people of the
covenant' the killer would not be able to even smell the aroma of paradise, even though
the scent of paradise can be smelt from the distance a person would travel over a 40
year period.

Indiscriminate killing is perhaps one of the most sickening acts any human being can
inflict on another. It reflects mindlessness, foolishness and through no reasonable
interpretation can it be
described as righteous. Yesterdays events demonstare the desperation the perpretrators
have
sunk to in wanting to achieve a goal. Yet they did not think this through for whilst
yesterdays events may have had a reactionary impact, instead of creating a divide, they
have brought us closer
together. They seemed to forget that London as a city is perhaps the most ethnically
diverse city on planet earth today. With such deep interactions in our daily lives, Muslims,
MUHAMMAD Christians, Jews, other,
BASIT the vast majority of Londoners know enough about one anothers belief systems to know
that none of them would endorse or tolerate such abhorent acts.

By addressing their agenda in the form of mindless killing, any valid criticism these
'terrorists' may have had is now lost. If for example their concern is over civilian
casualties in Iraq, how can they
possibly expect sympathy for their cause by creating civilian casualties somewhere else?
The proof of their failure is that they have become the same, if not worse than the ones
whom they criticise.

Allah Almighty states in Surah al-Maida that unless life is taken in a legitimate way (e.g.
the death penalty for murder) then the person killing someone is like him having killed all
of humanity. In Surah
an-Nisa Allah Almighty continues to say that if a person kills another person intentionally,
their reward is hell cont.........

Cont 7/8/2005 1:25 PM
And in Surah al-Israa,
Allah Almighty states that we are not allowed to kill somoene whom Allah has forbidden to
kill.

Prophet Muhammad observed that the strong isnt the one who overcomes people with
their strength, rather the strong is the one who controls themselves when angry. These
terrorists failed to achieve their objectives as neither were they able to control their anger
thus
engaging in such mindless acts, nor have Londoners succumbed to fear - anyone
watching the news yesterday will have seen how composed the victims of these atrocities
were and the effectiveness of the emergency services in managing the crisis.

London Mayor Ken Livingstone said, "This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty or
MUHAMMAD the powerful, it is not aimed at presidents or prime ministers, it was aimed at ordinary
BASIT working-class Londoners. That isn't an ideology, it isn't even a perverted faith, it's mass
murder. We know what the objective is. They seek to divide London. lack and white,
Muslim and Christian, Hindus and Jews, young and old. It was an indiscriminate attempt
to slaughter irrespective of any considerations for age, class, religion ... whatever."

I pray that the authoities can track down these terrorists and prosecute them to the full
extend of the law. But if they escape justice today they cannot escape tomorrow as Allah
Almighty says in Surah al-Ankabut, that in the end we will all return to Allah, and
Allah will tell us about the truth that we did in this life. May Allah Almighty have mercy and
protect us all from the foolish acts of the mindless, and may Allah have mercy and guide
us all, ameen

11.2
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

I AM SO SAD 7/9/2005 1:24 PM
THE intrest shown in this topic is very devistated and it clearly shows how many of us
around peace and how many want to spread hatred war crims......its a pity on alll of us....
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
7/9/2005 1:04 PM
MUHAMMAD BASIT, since when were the people of the world required to act only
through the UN?

James Simply because the UN is a failure, doesn't mean people around the world can't stand up
to terrorism, tyranny, and religious extremists.
7/9/2005 1:04 PM
"but alas some fools are using name of Islam for the justification and its giving more and
more bad name to muslims and Islam"

Not just using the name, but Mosques are used as terrorist planning centers. Muslim
clerics around the world are heard preaching hate. Islamic nations stone defenseless
James women to death.

Today, thanks to Islamic extremists, the religion is seen as intolerent, violent and the
farthest thing from peace.
@james 7/9/2005 1:26 PM
plz read my first posts i said i dont want blame games or any other pointing out things i
want support to end terrorism of everykind so plz try to do that dont just go all on blaming
MUHAMMAD and starting acquisations without any base or ground
BASIT
7/9/2005 2:14 PM
"Is the attack the fault of the terrorists, or of Britain? " <<<< BUSH

Jean -
françois
7/9/2005 3:27 PM
It would be great to let a better world to our children...we can only do our best and use wha

Matheus
@ mattew 7/10/2005 6:18 AM
At Last one of the people realized the importance of peace... i deeply thankyou for
supporting peace and not started the blame game...thanku very much....
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
Yes i agree with u 7/10/2005 7:58 AM
hey basit i strongly agree with u that it is the time for the peace ... but until we discuss our
differences our differences we won't be having it ...
but when ever we get to doo that some dumb ppl like rosney end up saying rubbish that is
totally agaist anyone's beleif..... she still know that no religion ever allows that .... but only
to justify her country inhuman activity .... b'coz she know that what ever her country is
Jehanzeb doing is totally agaist the humanity....
Yes i agree with u 7/10/2005 7:58 AM
hey basit i strongly agree with u that it is the time for the peace ... but until we discuss our
differences our differences we won't be having it ...
but when ever we get to doo that some dumb ppl like rosney end up saying rubbish that is
totally agaist anyone's beleif..... she still know that no religion ever allows that .... but only
to justify her country inhuman activity .... b'coz she know that what ever her country is
Jehanzeb doing is totally agaist the humanity....

@jehanzeb 7/10/2005 11:12 AM
Mr jehanzab just tell me one thing whenever in this world one get to settled down its
differences by blaming each other....remember my words average people just do things
MUHAMMAD great people preach things...but heros of all time gave sacrifices to give there future

11.3
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

BASIT generations to have a place of peace and love.....
plz 7/11/2005 12:03 AM
If u want to solve differences then try to learn how to give sacrifices and learn how to
bear all the pain to have a secure and peaceful future......
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
waiting 7/11/2005 7:32 AM
waitingggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

MUHAMMAD
BASIT
Hey 7/11/2005 9:02 AM
U talk abt heros i must tell u that heroo will never let his dignity down.... what every hero bv
what happens when ppl go after his belief he will surely retaliate ...
dear _____ who ever u r i don wanna say anything more than that
HEROS R NOT ALWAYS WINNERS....

AND UNTIL DIFFERENCES R SOLVES THERRE WUD BE NO PEACE .... PLEASE TELL
Jehanzeb PEACE OUT OUR DIFFERENCES THORUGH THIS DISCUSSIONS, NOT BY JUST CON
BELIEF....
7/12/2005 10:13 AM
Floods are causing too much distraction and lives disrepted of thousands of ppl in
Pakistan plz everyone pray for all of them.....
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
may peace be upon us! 7/12/2005 12:36 PM
despite the efforts of some people(like rosney, jehanzeb and ohreally) i still believe on
peace, but it's too hard when both sides don't want it, when both want to be winners.

Hugo
peace 7/12/2005 8:01 PM
peace can never b restored unless v curb in-justice. in-justice creat despration amongst pp
dont just think abt peace while sitting safe n sound in ur houses amongst so many loving n
around
rather just imagine u r lookin at the isralies buldooser ruining ur house (in gaza strip) n u r
know no 1 can stop these buldooser. not even united nation coz america will veto it. imagin
present in guantanamo bay or u r in abu ghareeb (wat happened there every 1 knows)
imagine ur sis, mom r amongst the raped in abu ghareeb.
ur bros n father r amongst those humilated in there n than talk to urslef can there b peace
no peace cant rise unless u act by Mohammad's words (during the pilgmirage)
"no black has ny privilige over white n no white has ny privilige over black ur prestigue n ur
as sacred as is this year, this month n this day"
Mutawassam
no veeeto powers
no privilages
v want eqaulity of rights
equality is peace
7/13/2005 11:18 AM
I agree, Muhhamad Basi,

so give to the police the names of the radicals that go to the same mosquee as you do.

This is a good start.

... shoud start seeking for the peace if it is peace you want, by giving away all of the
Yan radicals inside their mosquees.

Why do they not do this?
7/13/2005 5:21 PM
mutwasam, peace cannot be achieved by mohhamad's words(simply because people of
other religions won't listen to it). It's by consensus between reasonable people from both
sides that are fighting.

11.4
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

Hugo
Muhammad's word 7/13/2005 6:43 PM
ohhhhhhhh
i never thought to have such an answer frm some 1 here
do u think i dont know it ?
if u, than u r wrong coz i saw a lot of roseny in this community who will disagree nything
said by Muhammad

by the way i talk abt the idealogy of Muhammad which rejects the differences of 1st, 2nd
n 3rd world n watches every 1 equaly n justfully as 1 of very prominat men of islam Ali
Mutawassam said
"Govt. of non believer can sustain but that of unjust can't"

never in this world one get to settled down its differences by blaming each
people just do things great people preach things...but heros of all time gave sacrifices to
MUHAMMAD place of peace and love.....
BASIT
plz 7/11/2005 12:03 AM
If u want to solve differences then try to learn how to give sacrifices and learn how to bear
all the pain to have a secure and peaceful future......
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
waiting 7/11/2005 7:32 AM
waitingggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg

MUHAMMAD
BASIT
Hey 7/11/2005 9:02 AM
U talk abt heros i must tell u that heroo will never let his dignity down.... what every hero
bvelieves on he does it but what happens when ppl go after his belief he will surely
retaliate ...
dear _____ who ever u r i don wanna say anything more than that
HEROS R NOT ALWAYS WINNERS....

AND UNTIL DIFFERENCES R SOLVES THERRE WUD BE NO PEACE .... PLEASE
Jehanzeb
TELL ME THAT HOW CAN V PEACE OUT OUR DIFFERENCES THORUGH THIS
DISCUSSIONS, NOT BY JUST CONTADICTING NY1'S BELIEF....
7/12/2005 10:13 AM
Floods are causing too much distraction and lives disrepted of thousands of ppl in
Pakistan plz everyone pray for all of them.....
MUHAMMAD
BASIT
may peace be upon us! 7/12/2005 12:36 PM
despite the efforts of some people(like rosney, jehanzeb and ohreally) i still believe on
peace, but it's too hard when both sides don't want it, when both want to be winners.

Hugo
peace 7/12/2005 8:01 PM
peace can never b restored unless v curb in-justice. in-justice creat despration amongst
ppl
dont just think abt peace while sitting safe n sound in ur houses amongst so many loving
n caring persons around
rather just imagine u r lookin at the isralies buldooser ruining ur house (in gaza strip) n u r
lookin at that n know no 1 can stop these buldooser. not even united nation coz america
will veto it. imagine u r one of those present in guantanamo bay or u r in abu ghareeb
(wat happened there every 1 knows)
imagine ur sis, mom r amongst the raped in abu ghareeb.
ur bros n father r amongst those humilated in there n than talk to urslef can there b peace
Mutawassam ?
no peace cant rise unless u act by Mohammad's words (during the pilgmirage)
"no black has ny privilige over white n no white has ny privilige over black ur prestigue n
ur possesions are as sacred as is this year, this month n this day"

11.5
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

no veeeto powers
no privilages
v want eqaulity of rights
equality is peace
7/13/2005 11:18 AM
I agree, Muhhamad Basi,

so give to the police the names of the radicals that go to the same mosquee as you do.

This is a good start.

... shoud start seeking for the peace if it is peace you want, by giving away all of the
Yan radicals inside their mosquees.

Why do they not do this?
7/13/2005 5:21 PM
mutwasam, peace cannot be achieved by mohhamad's words(simply because people of
other religions won't listen to it). It's by consensus between reasonable people from both
sides that are fighting.
Hugo
Muhammad's word 7/13/2005 6:43 PM
ohhhhhhhh
i never thought to have such an answer frm some 1 here
do u think i dont know it ?
if u, than u r wrong coz i saw a lot of roseny in this community who will disagree nything
said by Muhammad

by the way i talk abt the idealogy of Muhammad which rejects the differences of 1st, 2nd
n 3rd world n watches every 1 equaly n justfully as 1 of very prominat men of islam Ali
Mutawassam said
"Govt. of non believer can sustain but that of unjust can't"

hmmmmmmmmm 7/16/2005 8:57 AM
@hugo-----thnx a lot for atleast trying to encourage me and support me for peace...and
buddy hard bashers like ppl u mentioned only know to hate and spread hatred...but may be
what we are trying to do can change ther plans of action....
@mutawassam as i said earlier i dont want the blame game going on here just want some
support and words of encouragement not the acquisations or anything..i know what u want
to say but there are somethings in the world one have to achive no matter how big sacrifice
one have to give....
@yan-----first of all ppl commiting terrorism are twisted minded and i simply say out one
thing with all the faith in ALMIGHTY ALLAH that terrorists are not muslims at all if they say
MUHAMMA they are thats where they are wrong...and secondly such radicals are attacking pakistani
D BASIT mosques the most and u know in last 15 years about 5572 ppl have only died with such
bombing attacks in pakistan only....but ppl arround the world still belive pakistan is backing
terrorism...and thats the most sad part i feel as a pakistani that being the victim of it we still
being accused of such un islamic acts.....i just want to see peace thats all i want i dont care
what price i have to pay but i want my next generation to live in peace with every nation
and religion with love and harmony and that is the only way that can make this world a
safer place.....
hmmmmmmmmm 7/16/2005 8:57 AM
@hugo-----thnx a lot for atleast trying to encourage me and support me for peace...and
buddy hard bashers like ppl u mentioned only know to hate and spread hatred...but may
be what we are trying to do can change ther plans of action....
@mutawassam as i said earlier i dont want the blame game going on here just want some
support and words of encouragement not the acquisations or anything..i know what u want
to say but there are somethings in the world one have to achive no matter how big
sacrifice one have to give....
MUHAMMA @yan-----first of all ppl commiting terrorism are twisted minded and i simply say out one
D BASIT thing with all the faith in ALMIGHTY ALLAH that terrorists are not muslims at all if they say
they are thats where they are wrong...and secondly such radicals are attacking pakistani
mosques the most and u know in last 15 years about 5572 ppl have only died with such
bombing attacks in pakistan only....but ppl arround the world still belive pakistan is backing
terrorism...and thats the most sad part i feel as a pakistani that being the victim of it we still

11.6
Kashmir Dispute;
Terrorism and Freedom Fight, Line of control; boundaries in red

being accused of such un islamic acts.....i just want to see peace thats all i want i dont
care what price i have to pay but i want my next generation to live in peace with every
nation and religion with love and harmony and that is the only way that can make this
world a safer place.....
WRONG 7/16/2005 3:29 PM
It's everything wrong: Democracy is not the only model of goverment, UN don't do nothing
to make the World better, religions are not saving or helping the people, africa are almost
death, USA are making a new cruzade for oil, Europe have not power to make diplomacy,
England are follow USA.... AGAIN, Nobody found Osama Bin Laden, Irael and Palestine
Túlio making that old War, Brazilian politicians steal our public money, There is Racism yet, We
are destroing the nature....... so we have a little time to be less WRONG and more RIGHT.
Great response 7/17/2005 1:07 PM
@tulio u r very right my friend there are bigger issues then blame games and enimity....its
time to join hands together and settle our differences to make peace a possiblity infinitly....
MUHAMMA
D BASIT
Muhammad: 7/18/2005 9:49 AM
I thank you for your answer.

you wrote: "@yan-----first of all ppl commiting terrorism are twisted minded and i simply
say out one thing with all the faith in ALMIGHTY ALLAH that terrorists are not muslims at
all if they say they are thats where they are wrong...and secondly such radicals are
attacking pakistani mosques the most and u know in last 15 years about 5572 ppl have
only died with such bombing attacks in pakistan only....but ppl arround the world still belive
pakistan is backing terrorism...and thats the most sad part i feel as a pakistani that being
the victim of it we still being accused of such un islamic acts.....i just want to see peace
thats all i want i dont care what price i have to pay but i want my next generation to live in
peace with every nation and religion with love and harmony and that is the only way that
can make this world a safer place....."

The Quran quotes:
Yan
"If your neighbour is not muslim, thou shall fight thy neighbour."

This said, if you want to search for peace the answer is simple: deliver names to the world
authorities of the fanatical people on your mosquee.

Otherwise you are just talking, hurts me to say it.

But I really am impressed that muslims are not delivering the names of the fanatical and
dangerous muslims they may know.
@yan 7/18/2005 10:17 AM
The Quran quotes:
"If your neighbour is not muslim, thou shall fight thy neighbour."
strange i read quran numerouse times n was not able to find this vers how u did found
found it wonderful yan u r a geniouse plzzzzz give me the reference i also wana b a
suicide bomber i wana kill ppl give the reason 4 it plzzzzzzzzzzzz give me the place where
it is writteen eagrerly waiting for ur asnwer ?plzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Mutawassa
m
@yan 7/18/2005 1:30 PM
first i like to say mr yan that the verse u quoted has nothin to do with quran it simply dont
exist in it......secondly u say that muslims should tell the names and the ppl commiting
such acts and give there names to authorities...if i am not mistaken the approxiamtely may
be my stats are wrong 12741 terrorist alone were caught by pakistani authorities and
about 1022 were handed over to usa....and others are facing trials in pakistani
courts...simply now u tell me what else the paksitani government do....check ur links and u
will be amazed to see that pakistan's name is at the top in the war against terrorism for
MUHAMMA capturing most of the radicals.....banned almost 13 strong groups who were representing
D BASIT extrimesim acts......and recently pakistani president announced country wide operation
against radicals which are on the run or hiding in b/w normal gentry of pakistan.....mr yan
pakistan is very sophisticated country and matters here have so many links with one
another.....i am living here and i know the ground reality whats happening here dont belive
in any news u see or read in any reports