Why Clinton should visit Pakistan

friend:#183

So now you hindu are in a friend`s clothing.How low can you stoop!but of course you can take any form as per your beliefs.

1)The idea is to protect muslims in Kashmir.That is precisely our ``God given right``---to protect muslims like Ghaznavi & Quasim did.

Your job is to try to avoid shudars & maleechh or if you are one,to stay away from the shadow of a brahmin lest he may say `AAj kiss ka munh dekh kay uthha tha``.You should also specialise in jantries & kundlees.A brand of diet-cowurine as a national drink & cowdung burgers could bring you revenues & lift you out of your chamaar existence in the comity of nations.

You wouldn`t be reading this if you were not sadistic enough to be itching for muslim company.

2)Since when has it become your business to know about our plans for bengalee muslims.Maybe they are an asset for us being where they are.

3)If Daravars & bheels had a say there would be no hindu & no India today.There goes your majority theory.

4)Where will hindus go once we have Kashmir & muslims? Just try to locate the long lost buddhists who ruled the roost during Ashoka`s days.Do they still trouble you with indigestion?

PS:Fellow Pakistanis.Since in Pakistan we do not really want to know what hinduism is please understand at least this:(this shuts up a lot of hindus in secularist skin)They eat cow-dung & drink cow/bull urine.Even TIME magazine reported it sometime ago once(such farangi sources they value real high).



As I said before:Hindus must learn to behave in the generous company of Pakistani Muslims.They should be grateful for being given this privilege.



wassalaam.

In reply to Farangi_kush (#171) who wrote :

Do you know that Bajpayee refused to be administered the oath to his office by the Indian President---simply because the President is a Shudr or Dalit??

and who later insists that he is truthful.

My comments : In the same air of unreality that seems to pervade Pakistani message boards, I propose the following headlines :

EVIL HINDU BANIAS HACK CNN SITE.

E.H.B.s` hacked CNN to insert false news items and even to change history (e.g., to change the name of the Indian President who administered the oath of office to PM Vajpayee in May 1996), rather than to let the truth be known that Vajpayee refused to take the oath from the Dalit President K.R. Narayanan.

http://www.cnn.com/ASIANOW/south/9910/13/india.new.govt.02/

``The 72-year-old leader was administered the oaths of office and secrecy by President K.R. Narayanan in the forecourt of the red sandstone presidential palace in the heart of the capital, New Delhi.

(This was Vajpayee`s third time as PM, newsitem from Oct 13, 1999.).

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9803/19/india.govt/index.html

``In a ceremony broadcast live throughout India, Vajpayee was sworn in by President K.R. Narayanan before 2,000 guests. Because of the size of the crowd, the inauguration took place in the courtyard of the presidential mansion and not inside as is customary.``

(The above was Vajpayee`s second time round, newsitem from March 19, 1998).

EVIL HINDU BANIAS REWRITE HISTORY.

(Vajpayee`s first time as PM, in May 1996, was during the tenure of President Shankar Dayal Sharma).

e.g.,http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9605/21/india.uncertainty/index.html

and

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9605/15/india/index.html

------

-arun gupta

1. It is surprising that Pakistanis are obsessed with ensuring ``democracy`` in Kashmir.

Wouldn`t it be better that they ensure democracy in their own country? Pakistan, a country supposed to be for muslims, butchered tens of thousands of Baluchis, millions of Bangladeshis, has not give self-determination rights to sindhis and sold part of Kashmir to China. With this record, wouldn`t it be better for Umairs, ylhs and Farangi`s of this board to first ensure ``democracy`` within Pakistan.

2. Many umairs, ylhs and farangi`s on this board like to belive that fighting wars for muslims is Pakistan`s god given right. Why is Pakistan not using it for the sake of its stranded muslim citizens in Bangladesh?

3. And what is ``democracy``? If majority`s wishes in country were to be taken for decision making, Pakistan wouldn`t have happened in 1947, West Pakistan would have become ``west Bangladesh`` in 1971. If majority was to be determined at family and home level, Pakistan and India would be having millions of scattered land pieces.

4. Let us assume for a moment that Kashmir is made a ``muslim state``. What will happen to its non-muslim population? Will they slowly disappear like what happened in Pakistan? Will they be made third class citizen? Or perhaps they will all be killed?

It is time that Pakistan should stop poking its nose in Kashmir.

I posted this on the other `Clinton Visit` discussion on CHOWK. I think this is the more appropriate place. I am looking for answers. Good ones!

All, your comments welcome.

For what it is worth, here are my two cents on the big `K`. I have been reading up on Kashmir and trying to see things through the lenses of each aggrieved party. One thing that jumps at you right away is that the situation in Kashmir is unique, it can`t be compared to any situation in history, even though very often you see people drawing parallels to Kosovo, Chechnya etc.

Why - is a big question that comes to mind.

History has always showed that the Kashmiris are a peace loving people. For centuries, the Kashmiris have lived peacefully with each other, no matter whether they were Muslim, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist or any other denomination. The beauty of their surroundings has probably taught them that harmony among beings is what beauty is all about.

Are all the Kashmiris, namely, the Muslims, the Hindus, the Sikhs and the Ladhaki Buddhists joining hands in demanding self-determination? Do they, as Kashmiris, see that they can carve themselves out as a nation and see the possibility of better prospects for themselves in doing so? Do they stand up in unison to drive out the scourge of the oppressor - whoever that might be?

Muslims are the majority. Are the majority Muslims in dialogue with their no-less-Kashmiri Hindu, Sikh and Buddhist brethren to determine a common ground for their future? Do I see a liberation movement that is Kashmiri? - a liberation movement that puts Kashmir as the number one reason and not religion or any other reason?

Or, is this whole self-determination thing a supplanted external concept of very recent origins? I am just asking questions. If Kashmir must secede for the only reason of religion, then I see a lot of problems with that. What is to be the plight of the other non-Muslim Kashmiris? Do they have any say? Or because they are not the majority they just have to give up their rights?

If the Kashmiri liberation movement can present itself to the world that it is a movement for Kashmir and not for Islam, then you are going to see a lot more people giving heed to the cause. At the present time, because of the whole partition thing, Pakistan, the Jehadi outfits etc, the world does not perceive the movement as a Kashmiri liberation movement, but rather as a movement with completely different goals.

Until 1989, the end of the Soviet Afghan conflict, Kashmir was peaceful. I read travel accounts of Western tourists who had visited Kashmir in the early eighties who claim they saw no signs of any trouble brewing. This definitely points to an external source for the origins of the movement.

I have no problem accepting a Kashmiri movement that puts Kashmir first.

The other puzzling question is why is Pakistan putting Kashmir ahead of itself? I see Pakistan putting all its resources and energies into one basket - Kashmir. Why? Pakistan is about religion, should Kashmir be about religion too? Where is the connection between a Kashmiri freedom movement and Pakistan? Is Pakistan giving moral support for a Kashmiri movement or an Islamic movement? As long as Pakistan is supporting the Islamic movement in Kashmir under the guise of supporting a Kashmiri movement, the world is going to continue to call its bluff.

This Kashmir movement thing has nothing truly Kashmiri about it. Until it becomes that, there are going to be very few takers.

sac #178

Thanks, now I breathe easier :-)

Excerpts from Stephen Cohens` press briefing on March 13 after a trip to India and Pakistan maybe of interest

www. brookings.edu/comm/transcripts/20000313.htm

``...But Kargil was India`s first television war, and the Kandahar hijacking was India`s first television hijacking. I think there`s a real danger that these events, replayed on television and in India`s powerful film industry, will shape an Indian identity that incorporates an anti-Pakistani component. ...``

``...But I`ve found that the military in Pakistan understood the notion of mutual restraint. They also understand the notion of increasing pressure. And their underlying philosophy is that if you hurt the Indians hard enough, if you cause enough pain to India, then the Indians will come to the bargaining table. In my judgment, that`s a complete misreading of the Indian psychology. In fact, it`s hardened the Indian position, it`s not weakened it....``

(End excerpts)

Sadhana

re sadna #164

Spy :) Spy :).......

Please read my reply #166

re bd #166

If memory serves me correctly there were a lot of angry Indian relatives crashing the gates of the Prime Minister`s house when the hijacking episode was going. And please correct me if I am wrong there was only one body bag sent back home uptil that time. India or for that matter any country cannot remain oblivious for long to the loss of its young ones for a cause that has almost no public support. Sooner or later India will have to swallow its pride and come to the bargaining table. History is just not on its side.

umairr,

ideally i should ignore you, but you keep coming back to irritate people. so now onwards, i will pose the following to you, everytime you shed crocodile tears about human rights of kashmiris:

1. to the `military-man` umairr,

please explain to the chowkwallas why pakistan ceded kashmiri land to china in 1962? were the kashmiris consulted before that was done?

2. to the `human rights` umairr,

doesn`t it bother you even little that while the whole pakistani nation is obsessed with the rights of the kashmiris (who are not pakistani citizens), thousands of pakistans`s own citizens are living in appalling conditions in refugee camps in bangladesh waiting for repatriation? why don`t the advocates of human rights (like you) ever bother to comment on that? why is getting kashmiris their rights more important to pakistan than admitting its own people in the country?

anyone who quotes u.n. resolutions and accuses india of not implementing those, is either ignorant or a hypocrite.

anyone who advocates human rights of kashmiris but calls the killings of civilians by terrorists as `exception`, is either ignorant or a hypocrite.

anyone who quotes amnesty international reports detailing indian army acts, but ignores the equally heinous (if not more) acts by the terrorists supported by the pakistani govt, is either ignorant or a hypocrite.

pullu:#176

It is easy to say that somebody`s facts are wrong.Are you the last word on facts? I have the Indian sources right here on the net to prove it.I would have reproduced them had you approached this in a civil manner to learn,but accusatory & loving all things Indian has been drilled into your head.Just review all the posts by the Indians and you will know what I mean.Others reading this know what I mean and can see through your charade.Vajpayee did not take oath from a Dalit---Find out yourself!!



ravi m:#173

Spare us the opportunity to start fighting in bazaar or chowk.The thrashings given to hindus inside their own territory was feel-good.If your mai-baap Clinton had not intervened maore Halvara would have happened to hindus.

If you have worries about Musharraf please do them in your home,bazaar,or chowk.

We are proud Pakistani Muslim & our generosity is as legendary as the miserliness & avariciousness of a bania.

PS:Dear Pakistanis,Please keep in mind that what you consider a past-time the Hindus view it as an ominous cyberGhaznavi raid.Their chaddis aren`t dry as yet.Their ministry of propaganda works overtime.



CEASE & DESIST!!!

Umairr #173:

Umairr, with all due respect, you are totally ignorant of the ground realities in Doda. Doda is the largest district in J&K (barring Ladakh) and is almost totally mountanous. The Chenab cuts the district in two, with the Seoj Dhar, Pir Panjal and Greater Himalayas pinning the district in South, West, and North East respectively. The pattern of insurgency in Doda has always been that militants hide out in the upper reaches to escape security forces. You might have heard of the killing of 35 Himachal labourers in 1998 in Chamba, HP. They were laying a road from Chamba into Doda, and the killing was to hinder the construction.

Bascically, troops on Search and destroy operations need increased mobility due to the nature of the terrain and the oppurtunity it offers for ambush. Often enough there are a very limited number of ways to get to a mountain top. And reinforcements take time to come in due to poor roads. So the increased mobility of helos is a must and has been asked for since 1992-3 when insurgency began. That it has been granted, for whatever reason, is a good thing. Don`t get emotional and compare Chechenya with Kashmir. They are two different situations calling for different military and political solutions. Lumping things together does not always work.

Firangi_Kush:

There are all kinds of reports I could pick out too to go after Pakistan. I am not interested in going after or slandering Pakistanis. But I do have a beef against your military rulers, who appear to get themselves (and us) into lethal situations without using their brains first.

Just 2 small points, body bags start making a difference only when the sanctity of human life outweighs other considerations, given the respective countries lack of respect for human life, it will not make a difference at all.

Second point, I really find it extremely relative between gun ships being used on AK 74 armed militants / freedom fighters and kalasnikovs on unarmed defenceless Hindus / Sikhs / Muslims. We are trying to draw the distinction between the massacre between a flying gun and a handheld gun, both which are being used to kill? A rather fine distinction, dont you think?

cheers

bd

Farangi_Kush reply #171

As Always, you are wrong again on facts.

It is a democracy here my friend. And no politician, much less of the stature and maturity

of Vajpayeeji(note the `V`) can afford to show

any discord to a Dalit.The party, forget the person, would be wiped into oblivion. And you speak of the President of India. Laughable facts. President of India is a very respected person here.

Umairr reply #173

India has always been against the two nation theory. It is the basis of modern India.Hence anybody claiming kashmir only because it is Muslim dominated, asks for outright rejection. So when people resort to voilence, they

shall get voilence. It is a norm everywhere and that includes Pakistan. Today if Sindh demands independence, would you kiss them on their cheeks,

shouting ``human rights zindabad``. Even while they

resort to voilence. Nobody would. Kashmir is not an exception. Wherever there are separatists, Army has been used, by every nation.If Quebec resorts to killing, even they would be treated in the same way by Canada. But Quebec does not share a border with Pakistan.Lucky Canada.

regards

Umairr #173:

Umairr, with all due respect, you are totally ignorant of the ground realities in Doda. Doda is the largest district in J&K (barring Ladakh) and is almost totally mountanous. The Chenab cuts the district in two, with the Seoj Dhar, Pir Panjal and Greater Himalayas pinning the district in South, West, and North East respectively. The pattern of insurgency in Doda has always been that militants hide out in the upper reaches to escape security forces. You might have heard of the killing of 35 Himachal labourers in 1998 in Chamba, HP. They were laying a road from Chamba into Doda, and the killing was to hinder the construction.

Bascically, troops on Search and destroy operations need increased mobility due to the nature of the terrain and the oppurtunity it offers for ambush. Often enough there are a very limited number of ways to get to a mountain top. And reinforcements take time to come in due to poor roads. So the increased mobility of helos is a must and has been asked for since 1992-3 when insurgency began. That it has been granted, for whatever reason, is a good thing. Don`t get emotional and compare Chechenya with Kashmir. They are two different situations calling for different military and political solutions. Lumping things together does not always work.

Firangi_Kush:

There are all kinds of reports I could pick out too to go after Pakistan. I am not interested in going after or slandering Pakistanis. But I do have a beef against your military rulers, who appear to get themselves (and us) into lethal situations without using their brains first.

Shankar#159

Your first point that India is evil, said by me is wrong.

Actions are evil. Not name.

Killing of its own people (India claims as such) is evil. Leaving the wolf open in the form of security forces is evil. Terrorizing neighboring countries is evil.

You take out India`s name and Kashmir name and think about actions only. What would you say.

Moreover, If you are aware of History of Kashmir, you know that Kashmiris always wanted their right for self determination, which has been manipulated and denied even before this recent 10-12 years of uprising.

Who can guarantee that if Kashmiris stop their militant attitude, India suddenly will realize the rights of Kashmiris.

``India uses gun-ships in Kashmir

NEW DELHI, March 28: India has for the first time used helicopter gun-ships to attack Mujahideen positions in occupied Kashmir, a senior defence official said on Tuesday.

``An operation was carried out by the Indian air force on a specific request from the army using helicopter gun-ships to attack terrorist positions,`` said the official.

The official said two Russian-built M17 gun-ships were used at two locations in the southern district of Doda last Friday during separate encounters with freedom fighters.

``We used two helicopters to retain the element of surprise,`` he said, adding the gun-ships conducted two ``highly successful`` sorties against entrenched fighters there.

Three Mujahideen were killed in one of the attacks, in which the gun-ships, backed by ground forces, strafed their positions with rockets and machineguns.``

(DAWN, Pakistan)

In his one-sided approach, Clinton seems to have given the green signal to the Indian govt. and army to increase their firepower in Kashmir. I wish he would have at least taken the time to go to Kashmir, or hear out a joint Kashmiri delegation. Helicopter gunships vs human beings is not a very humane operation. Then again, from the comments I have seen on this website, there are people who will actually be happy this is happening.

Bill Bradley, the US Presidential candidate made an interesting comment about Chechnya, where the Soviets are using helicopter gunships, as well. I think his insight applies equally to the Kashmir situation. He stated that military suppression of freedom movements is a lose-lose situation for the country which pursues such a policy. One result may be that the freedom fighters will win their battle. If this happens, it will be very embarrassing for the military forces, as their atrocities will come out in the open. And the new independent country will go out of its way to completely disengage itself from its previous rulers. The second resut could be that the freedom fighters will lose their struggle. If this happens, then the victorious military will have converted a generation of freedom fighters into a generation of terrorists. In both cases, the occupying country loses out. That is why the British left India peacefully, even though they had ruled it for two to three times as long as India has ruled over Kashmir. Similarly that is why Canada held a referendum in Quebec, and did not send its military in there. I have nothing but admiration and respect for Canadian human rights policies.

It is always interesting to note the extent one human being will go to support the killing of fellow human beings. The only time a person has a right to kill someone is in self-defence. Anything other that that is just an attempt at satisfying ones one ego at the expense of another`s life.

I regularly deal with Indian employees who are battling with the US Immigration Service to get their US residencies. In many cases, I am directly involved in their immigration process. I try to help them out as much as I can, since I had to go through this process myself. So many of Indian employees have complained that the US INS is unfair and is not allowing them to control their own future (the waiting time for Indians is longer than the waiting time for most other countries). I tend to agree with them. A few months ago, the US INS handcuffed some Indian computer scientists in Texas. The uproar in the Indian community was amazing. Websites were full of hate for the INS. The hatred was understandable, since people with the same ethnicity, religion, national origin were being harmed.

I am over 50% ethnically Kashmiri from the part of Kashmir, where this violence is taking place. Nearly half my family still lives in Pakistan`s half of Kashmir. I have never met the Kashmiris who are fighting for their basic right of self-determination. However, I share the same ethnicity, religion, and origin with them. And I feel for them, just like the Indian community felt for the Indian computer scientists who were handcuffed. However, I have yet to figure out the crime the Kashmiris have committed. If fighting for one`s freedom against an occupier is a crime, then Jinnah, Nehru Gandhi, George Washington, etc. etc. were criminals also. Infact, every person who battled for the independence of his/her country would be a criminal.

The total death figure of civilians in Kashmir is now between 30,000 to 70,000. These are human beings, not animals. Yet everytime I bring up these atrocities, a wave of people stand up and attempt to justify the killings. I wonder if these people realize that by doing so they are actually indirectly contributing to these killings. Most of the genocides in history did not take place because of the actions of individual leaders. They took place because the general populace was brainwashed into supporting the genocide.

The general argument that is given is that the freedom fighters are killing just as many civilians as the Indian soldiers (someone even mentioned that since there are honor killings in Pakistan, hence it is alright for the Indian military to kill Kashmiris). The freedom fighters are operating in an area in which there is an overwhelmingly anti-India population. Why would they be interested in killing civilians who were actually supporting their cause? Although certain freedom fighters have killed Hindu civilians, this has been the exception and not the rule. While the killing of civlian freedom fighters by the Indian military has been the rule and not the exception. International Human Rights organizations have documented this quite well.

Unfortunately, the Indian govt. (and Bill Clinton now) has only demanded that the Kashmiris and Pakistani supported militants stop the fighting. The Indian govt. needs to state that it will also remove its soldiers from Kashmir, and pursue a peaceful solution, if the freedom fighters stop their struggle. Unless it makes a bilateral move, the violence will not stop. Even when two individuals are fighting, to expect one to stop while the other keeps fighting is not an effective solution.

I will do whatever little I can to ensure that the killings of innocent Kashmiris is not shoved under the carpet, even if people like Bill Clinton are trying to do so. In these situations, organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are a breath of fresh air. The tell it like it is, without any self-centered agendas.

By the way, when helicopter gunships are introduced into a freedom struggle it is usually an indication that the military is about to completely destroy the freedom struggle, or that the military has become desperate. In case of Kashmir, my guess would be the later. However, in either case, as I explained above, for India vis-a-vis Kashmiris, it is a lose-lose situation (as I have stated earlier, I don`t particularly care what Pakistan gets out of this deal).

Their is nothing more precious than a life of a human being. And to a human being, there is nothing more precious than the ability to decide his/her own future. Sometimes I wonder; how can someone hate the INS with such passion, yet support the BSF with an equal amount of passion.

Umairr#156



Dear Mr. Umairr

Let me start first by an apology if I have hurt your feelings. This is not in my agenda either to hurt or to spread lies about someone. My opinion about your views took the shape by reading your repeated posts on Kashmir/Pakistan issues. When I raised those questions, my purpose was sincere to know the viewpoints of a Kashmiri since the only other Kashmiri I used to know was a Shawlwala who was more bothered about his mundane life than where he was living. And since 1997, I do not have any contact with him, God knows wheteher he is killed by military/militia or freedom fighters or alive and stuggling for existence. With due respect to you, you have really not replied to my questions. If I had to go through again the amnesty international reports why did I ask you a specific question? that is what are the cases of opression by India in the first 35-40 years of independence. Let me redefine the question, prior to the recent upraisal seen in the last 10-12 years, can you list a detail chronology of Indian atrocities in Kashmir? Can you give us indication how many people lost their lives? Now let us move on to rights of people. You wrote:

``I think you and I have a different point of view on human rights. I believe every human being has certain human rights which are his/her alone. They cannot be violated by me, even if it is in my

own interest to do so. I cannot support you or anyone else occupying someone else`s home, city, state by force, just because it makes you feel good. You have a right to decide your own future.

You do not have a right to decide the future of other human beings``

You really did not mention what are those rights in real tangible terms, just some abstract ideas. And you decided to ignore my logic that India is occupying its own land which was invaded by people now calling their homes (may or may not be, do not get me wrong, I do not want to remove the people from there who are settled for hundreds of years). You carry on by saying `` Because if Kashmir goes, the 150 million Muslims in India will suffer heavily; there will be a civil war, a truly catastrophic situation.” “Well, what about the will of the Kashmiri people?” I asked politely. “Who knows their will?” He answered. “How about a plebiscite?``

So you know all to well what is the ramification of a situation like that, you will let the humanity of 1 billion people suffer all over again just for your whims that you do not like to stay in India. Your Kashmiri identity becomes so stong that an entire nation is just nothing to you, the entire nation can go through the bloodshed it had seen only 52 years back. You know what, most Indians just wish their nemesis Kashmir was never there.

Now let us move on, you did not reply to my other questions on prosperity and view on independent Kashmir. You said ``I am no one to decide the

measure of success that the Kashmiris should have. Wasn`t it Churchill who asked what measure of success an independent India would have once the British left? Perhpas India would have been more successful had the British been ruling it. Should India not have asked for independence?``

Is that all you can say about what prosperity, what way of life independent Kashmiris may enjoy? Is that your vision? You are again wrong in comparing India with British, British took away everything it could from India, whereas India is draining whatever excess it could have to defend Kashmir. Isn`t is that vague notion based on which the most respected leader of Pakistan ``Jinnah`` divided this otherwise would have been mighty powerful nation. Imagine what you and I could have achieved together. My family is one of the millions that suffered during partition. I am a born east Pakistani migrated to India, toiling abroad so that the money I can send to India can improve the status of my impoverished family in India who lost everything in partition, then again in 1971. My maternal grandfather( a retired lawyear at that time) was captured by Pak army in that fateful March. He had disappeared from the face of earth without any trace, and we could not give him a proper last rite. I do not remember all these very well, but when I see my nani it reminds me the whole thing all over again. Don`t show that ugly face of partition once again. Also try to recognize the terrorist act that wipes the innocent lives in the name of freedom fighting (Rupen Katiyal is one just to mention). It is the peaceful coexistence that is conducive to all the human rights that you failed to mention. It is not a child`s game that I do not like Indians/India, so I do not wish to stay with India. You have to give a proper shape and character to your disliking, what exactly of India bothers you so much, then only things can change. India can rectify its stand and make it more acceptable to Kashmiris.

Now you can ask me why I chose you to answer me all of the above. There are several reasons for that: i) you claim you are a Kashmiri, ii) you seem to be more rational and intellectual than others who just want to spread the cause of Kahmir without any logic, iii) you seem to be a powerful man somehow related to the silicon valley employing several Indians (gathered from your post, don`t remember the number of the post), and also influencial in Pakistani society (some connection with army). The last point is to ponder upon by the Indians is that all Bangladeshis and Pakistanis I met in US, Europe (although I came from a middle-class migrant family in India, I was lucky to have the opportunity in life to pull myself up) 90% of them are very rich backhome. One of the Bangladeshis, I know they own the biggest construction firms in Bangladesh. I wonder then why these countries are so poor.

Happy reading Mr. Umairr. Please do not take it other way, the suspicion about one another needs to be removed before any meaningful dialogue can begin.

Regards.

Cheraym

It is really quite uncivil of some Indians to make every issue discussed here as an opportunity to bash Pakistan.If there was not a pattern here I would not have observed this.Just a review of every post since last year(maybe before that too!)

would convince any die-hard secularist.

There is no need to belittle the country.We,as Pakistani people,are critical of ourselves being of the same family but we do not appreciate others trying to point out our warts to us---& we acknowledge that we do have some.

Pakistanis do not make it their mission to `study` Indians to tell them about themselves.It is none of our business & we do not consider them worth it.

Just to rub the point home so that the Indians get their own medicine(believe me it is no pleasure to `treat` them thus):

Do you know that Bajpayee refused to be administered the oath to his office by the Indian President---simply because the President is a Shudr or Dalit?? How about telling that to their mai-baap Clinton.

How about horoscopes & superstitions in the grandly touted `secular`(read:irreligious) politics & Parliament?Is this superstition superior to or any different from hinduism/paganism?

I have hundreds of such mirrors(contorted too) to show the Indians....but it is much better to behave when in the company of Pakistani muslims.



wassalaam.